Saturday, September 13, 2014

What a mess !

This objective error from 1949 would now be repeated in many other magisterial documents including Vatican Council II, where the Archbishop and the Jesuits were active. The error would be repeated in Redemptoris Missio(N.10 is contradicted by 28 etc.Issued in 1990). It is there in the Balamand Declaration(N.30, June 1993). It would then be reproduced in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1257.Issued in 1994 in English), Dominus Iesus(1 is contradicted by 2 etc.Issued in 2000),  Christianity and the World Religions (N.10 and 67.(1997)International Theological Commission) and The Hope of Infants who die without being baptised (N.59 etc (April 20.2007) International Theological Commission ) and other magisterial documents.
 
Here starts trouble for the Catholic Church.
1949:
Therefore, no one will be saved who, knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff, the Vicar of
Christ on earth.-Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel:
We do not know any case of someone 'knowing the Church to have been divinely established by Christ, nevertheless refuses to submit to the Church or withholds obedience from the Roman Pontiff,...'.The Letter implies that we do know. So these cases, are inferred to be exceptions to all needing to enter the Church with faith and baptism. They are in Heaven so how could they be exceptions to all needing the baptism of water.
It is a fact of life that we cannot see the dead. This is a factual error in the Letter of the Holy Office.

In His infinite mercy God has willed that the effects, necessary for one to be saved, of those helps to salvation which are directed toward man's final end, not by intrinsic necessity, but only by divine institution, can also be obtained in certain circumstances when those helps are used only in desire and longing. -Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel:
Again the Letter of the Holy Office assumes that those saved with 'only desire and longing' are physically visible on earth to be exceptions to the traditional interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney. Objectively in 1949 , they could not see these alleged replacements for the baptism of water.They did not exist. So the baptism of desire was never an exception or relevant to extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
 
However, this desire need not always be explicit, as it is in catechumens; but when a person is involved in invincible ignorance God accepts also an implicit desire, so called because it is included in that good disposition of soul whereby a person wishes his will to be conformed to the will of God. -Letter of the Holy Office 1949
Lionel:
If a person is saved in invincible ignorance it will be known only to God. This is something theoretical for us, hypothetical. The Letter assumes that a hypothetical  case is a de facto exception.A theoretical case is a subsititute for all needing the baptism of water for salvation in 1949?.
 The baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance were never exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. An injustice was done to Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Centers.
 
1949
Richard J. Cushing, Archbishop of Boston – Decree Regarding Leonard Feeney, April 18, 1949


Rev. Leonard Feeney, S.J., because of grave offense against the laws of the Catholic Church has lost the right to perform any priestly function, including preaching and teaching of religion.
Any Catholics who frequent St. Benedict’s Center, or who in any way take part in or assist its activities forfeit the right to receive the Sacrament of Penance and Holy Eucharist.
Given at Boston on the 18th day of April, 1949.
Lionel:
'has lost the right to perform any priestly function, including preaching and teaching of religion.' Note we now have an Archbishop who is teaching that there is known salvation outside the Church. He infers that there are physically visible cases of non Catholics saved without the baptism of water.This is objectively wrong. We caanot see or know cases in Heaven for them to be exceptions on earth to the necessity of the baptism of water for all, for salvation.
This objective error from 1949 would now be repeated in many other magisterial documents including Vatican Council II, where  Archbishop Richard Cushing  and the Jesuits were active. It would then be reproduced in  the Catechism of the Catholic Church(N.1257.English edition issued in 1994), Dominus  Iesus(N.1 is contradicted by N.2 etc), Redemptois Missio(N.10 is contradicted by N.28 etc), Balamand Declaration(N.30, June 1993), Christianity and the World Religions (N.10 and 67 (1997),International Theological Commission) and  The Hope of Infants who die without being baptised(N.59. (April 20.2007) International Theological Commission ) and other magisterial documents.
-Lionel Andrades

___________________________________________________



Factual Errors in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949

http://catholicforum.forumotion.com/t1247-factual-errors-in-the-letter-of-the-holy-office-1949
http://catholicism.org/father-feeney-fact-sheet.html

Bishop Charles Morerod in a doctrinal error says the SSPX cannot use Catholic Churches because of a doctrinal issue

The Call to Holiness and Catholic Identity Conference speakers will use a false premise in the interpretation of Vatican Council II, Redemptoris Missio, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Dominus Iesus... http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/09/the-call-to-holiness-and-catholic.html
Two Catholic Conferences this week end - how would they interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church ?

Two Catholic Conferences this week end: how would they interpret Redemptoris Missio? http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/09/two-catholic-conferences-this-week-end_11.html
Two Catholic Conferences this week end : how would they interpret Dominus Iesus ? http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2014/09/two-catholic-conferences-this-week


Posted by at
Labels:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)