Monday, October 20, 2014

All Catholics in Florence are being asked to intepret Vatican Council II and magisterial documents in an unethical manner

All the religious communities in Florence, including the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate have to accept Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents using this irrational premise,a lie.
Cardinal Giuseppe Betori is the Archbishop of Florence, Italy  and is the Grand Chancellor of the Faculta  Teologica dell' Italia Centrale,Florence which offers a Licentiate and Doctorate Degree in Theology for Catholic students.
Here they are taught that Lumen Gentium 16 refers to known exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation.  In other words those who are saved in invincible ignorance (LG 16),  are known and visible to them in 2014.So they are exceptions to the traditonal interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The students are taught to accept the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 which wrongly inferred to the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance  as being known to us, being  visible to us(they would have to be visible to us to be exceptions). They were the new exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma by Fr.Leonard Feeney of Boston.This error would have also been part of the cardinal's religious formation.
This irrationality, the use of the false premise (of being able to see the dead), with the false conclusion (the dead are exceptions to all needing the baptism of water in 2014), is approved by Cardinal Betori.
Even a non Catholic, like a member of the Buddhist group visiting the seminary in Florence, would know that we cannot see any one in Florence who is saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance. So these cases cannot be considered explicit. We cannot see people who are in Heaven.What is not explicit cannot be a defacto exception.
Yet this irrationality is approved by Cardinal Betori who was  appointed a member of the Congregation for Catholic Education. This year Pope Francis nominated him a member of the Pontifical Council of the Laity.
The Franciscans of the Immaculate  in Florence have to accept Vatican Council II with this irrational premise.They have to use a falsehood in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.
According to Vatican Council II (AG 7) all Muslims, and other non Catholics in Florence need faith and baptism for salvation. So they are oriented to Hell according to Vatican Council II (AG 7).This is not crypto lefebvrism this is Vatican Council II.
At the Faculta  Teologica dell' Italia Centrale,Florence they would be told that not all non Catholics need to enter Church formally in 2014.Since there are exceptions. They mean those  saved in invincible ignorance etc.These cases, for the cardinal in Florence, are known and visible in 2014 to be exceptions to all needing to enter the Church with faith and baptism for salvation ( to avoid Hell).
There is a rational option. Lumen Gentium 16 would refer to possibilities known only to God. They are hypothetical cases for us.They are not  known defacto. So we can accept Lumen Gentium 16 as a possibility but not an exception to the dogma on salvation.Lumen Gentium 16 cannot be an exception since there are no cases visible objectively.
We do not have to reject any thing in Vatican Council II when we affirm the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Vatican Council II is in agreement with the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.We have an option in the interpretation of the Council.This option is presently not known to the Archbishop of Florence.
The old ecclesiology and understanding of other religions is not contradicted by Vatican Council II if there is no premise on being able to see the dead-saved. The premise has not to be used.
So a priest could offer the Traditional Latin Mass in Florence and accept Vatican Council II with no change in ecclesiology.One does not have to be a sedevacantist or a 'Lefebvrian' to affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus with no exceptions according to Vatican Council II.
A Franciscan Friar of the Immaculate priest could hold the Feeneyite version of the dogma and be in agreement with Vatican Council II.It would not require telling a lie, using an irrational premise and being unethical.
Presently the theological teaching at Florence is unethical.They are asking students to use an irrational inference and so interpret Vatican Council II as a break with Catholic Tradition.
All the religious communities in Florence, including the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate have to accept Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents using this irrational premise- this lie.
Ascanio Ruschi is a legal counselor in Florence .He was informed by Cardinal Betori that  Father Serafino Lanzetta, the Parish Priest of the Church San Salvadaor in Ognisanti, Florence  was not allowed to offer the Traditional Latin Mass at the book launching ceremony of "Il Vaticano II: un Concilio pastorale" ( Edizioni Cantagalli). Ascanio Ruschi, is President of Comunione Tradizionale,Florence .
The President of Comunione Tradizionale must note that all Catholics in Florence are being asked to intepret Vatican Council II and magisterial documents in an unethical manner .He could write to the Archbishop about this and hopefully get a reply.
-Lionel Andrades

Michael Matt on the Synod

Posted by Tantumblogo
This came out on Thursday and I meant to post Friday but did not get to it, as usual.  Some pretty good comments below.  Even with the “triumph” of the “orthodox?” at the Synod and the (temporary?) blocking of the agenda of Pope Francis (from this point forward, I will attribute this synodal gambit to its obvious author), there is still much to be dismayed over the course of events this past two weeks.  The disastrous relation is out there, confirming souls in error, millions have been scandalized, radical errors put forward, sin abounds, etc., etc……so perhaps we should not be too cheered that at the 11th hour the wound to the Church turned out not to be life-threatening, but only very serious.  We are still in unprecedented times, the threat of schism is real, and it has become perfectly obvious that we have perhaps the most doctrinally radical Pope in the history of the Church.
That is to say, we have a very great deal to still be concerned and vigilant about.
I do think Matt may go a bit too negative at times.  I’m not sure what time of day this video was recorded, I tend to think it was before the “revolt” that occurred on Thursday was clear.  I am certain he was unaware of some of the vote tallies that have now been leaked on some of these matters – the scandalous comments about sodomites were opposed more than 2:1, and the admission of the divorced and remarried to the Blessed Sacrament by a large majority.  So it was not just a small but vocal minority opposing these destructive novelties – it was the large preponderance of the prelates.  And further commentary over the weekend implies that this papacy may be badly weakened as a result of being shown to be so distant from the mind of the Church.  But we shall see.
I will add this little bit – I do not know how many people answered Cardinal Burke’s call to prayer, and specifically the Chaplet of the Holy Face, but I know we prayed it as a family intently.  I am convinced that to whatever extent Doctrine has been preserved and the forces of relative orthodoxy strengthened, it was due to the prayers of the faithful, so please do not stop even though the Synod is over for now.  The threat remains.

Un ragazzo all'inferno

Un ragazzo all'inferno

Viveva a Londra, nel 1848, una vedova di ventinove anni, molto ricca e assai mondana. Tra i damerini che frequentavano la sua casa, si notava un giovane Lord, di condotta poco edificante.
Una notte, verso le dodici, la donna stava a letto leggendo un romanzo per conciliare il sonno. Appena spenta la candela per addormentarsi, si accorse che una strana luce, proveniente dalla porta, si diffondeva nella camera, crescendo sempre più. Meravigliata, spalancò gli occhi non sapendo spiegarsi il fenomeno. La porta della camera si aprì lentamente ed apparve il giovane Lord, complice dei suoi disordini.
Prima che essa potesse proferire parola, il giovane le fu vicino, l'afferrò al polso e disse in inglese: «C'è un Inferno, dove si brucia!».
Il dolore che la poveretta sentì al polso fu tale che svenne. Rinvenuta mezz'ora dopo, chiamò la camerie­ra, la quale entrando nella stanza sentì un forte puzzo di bruciato. La cameriera constatò che la padrona aveva al polso una scottatura così profonda da lasciar vedere l'osso, avente la superficie di una mano di uomo. Osservò ancora che dalla porta il tappeto aveva le impronte di passi d'uomo e che ne era bruciato il tessuto da una parte all'altra.
Il giorno seguente la signora seppe che la stessa notte il giovane Lord era morto.
[Brano di Don Giuseppe Tomaselli tratto da "L'inferno c'è". Imprimatur: Catania, 22-11-1954, Sac. N. Ciancio Vic. Gen.]

Avv. Ascanio Ruschi perché Fr.Fidenzio Volpi OFM, Commissario Apostolico dei Francescani dell'Immacolata vuole che la comunità FFI accettare il Concilio Vaticano II, con una premessa irrazionale? Non è questo immorale ?

MiL -
Avv. Ascanio Ruschi perché Fr.Fidenzio Volpi OFM,l Commissario Apostolico dei Francescani dell'Immacolata vuole che la comunità FFI accettare il Concilio Vaticano II, con una premessa irrazionale? Non è questo immorale ? Soddisfare le norme secolari della giustizia?
Digital Camera
E possibile accettare Concilio Vaticano II senza la interpretazione con il false premessa-Lionel Andrades

Non uso una inferenza irrazionale, una falsa premessa,non c'è discontinuità tra il Concilio Vaticano II e della Tradizione

Perché è il dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus e scritto con riferimento alla Mystici Corporis?

Sappiamo di casi nel 2014 salvato con il battesimo di desiderio ecc?

I reject an explicit baptism of desire and affirm the traditional and centuries old interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus.If it is not explicit it is not an exception


E importante notare che Mystici Corporis non dice che battesimo di desiderio sono fisicamente visibili o una eccezione per extra ecclesiam nulla salus

Papa Pio XII commette un errore? : tradizionalisti e progressivisti usano la stessa irrazionalita

E ‘stato quattro mesi e p.Angelo Geiger FFI non può ancora rispondere se i Frati Francescani dell’Immacolata può accettare il Concilio Vaticano II, come faccio io

Dobbiamo ricordare che noi esseri umani non possiamo vedere i morti che ora sono in paradiso o all'infernon

The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) and the Vatican Curia's doctrinal position has become their political stand : talks could collapse again because of egoism

The Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) and the Vatican Curia's doctrinal position has become their political position.Both are making a doctrinal error and not admitting it in public.The SSPX -CDF talks show that both groups are not being honest. Individual members could be protecting their reputations.They may not want to disappoint friends and supporters.This is a political issue for them.They have to stay with the 'party line'. They cannot say that all these years both groups made a major doctrinal error.
Someone important has to stand up and tell the Vatican Curia and the SSPX leadership that we cannot physically see the dead on earth so Vatican Council II does not contradict Church teachings on other religions and Christian communities.There can be only one rational hermeneutic- that of continuity.

Consider Dr.Joseph Shaw who comes across as a liberal and traditionalist in England.He will not say there are no explicit exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus mentioned in Vatican Council II.No exceptions in Vatican Council II ? Can he proclaim that 'rigid' position? He will not affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus as a professor of theology.Since at Oxford University  they reject the dogma and he is employed by them.
 He is also the Chairman of the Latin Mass Society recognised by the Vatican.So prudent ,he will not criticize the factual error made by Gavin D'Costa on a video.The video is placed on the websites of the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales and the University of Bristol.

He will not raise his voice on this issue even when the Vatican-SSPX doctrinal talks collapse once again.He attends the Traditional Latin Mass  and is under the liberal political Establishment.
Similarly Dr.Joh Rao has an academic career to protect and will love to talk at conferences where he will not affirm extra ecclesiam nulla salus in Vatican Council II.
Even the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney are making this same error and so reject Vatican Council II. For the the Council is a break with the past and the dogma according to Fr.Leonard Feeney.They use a false premise in the interpretation of the Council. This is their political position as traditionalists even after being informed.
I  asked Louie Verrecchio, blogger and speaker, who attends Holy Mass at an SSPX chapel to answer TWO QUESTIONS 1.if Louie Verrechio answers those two questions frankly, he will be out of step with John Vennari and Christopher Ferrera and the rest of the SSPX.Doctrine is a political issue.Theology has become political.
Neither will Verrecchio or any of the SSPX priests answer the two questions. Cardinal George Pell refuses to answer them.An Archbishop,priests and a lay apologist have answered those two questions.2.
I have been able to write all this since I am not in any of the political camps, proper.I am not a traditionalist.I  do not criticize the Neo Catechumenate Way (NCW) or the Charismatic Renewal. I attend Mass in the vernacular and support Medugorje and other  apparitions of Our Lady.
For me the NCW, Charismatics and Traditionaists  are all making a common error on doctrine.People in Heaven, for them, are visible exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus. This irrationality is not traditional but a subtle modernism accepted by the traditionalists.So the Traditionalists reject Vatican Council II(with the premise) and the NCW others accept it.Both are using the irrational inference which comes from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.Both groups seem unaware that Vatican Council II can be interpreted without the irrationality.They are in the same leaky boat.
 I hope when I have to make difficult decisions I will always choose the Cross;.I hope I will always choose suffering, and not what my ego finds comfortable. There are many times when I fail too.-Lionel Andrades

1) Do we personally know the dead now saved in invincible ignorance, a good conscience (LG 16) etc,can we see them, are they physically visible to us in 2014 ?
2) Since we do not know any of these cases, in real life, they are not visible for us, there are no known exceptions to the literal interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, or Ad Gentes 7 which states 'all' need 'faith and baptism' for salvation ? 

Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson has said that the Society of St.Pius X must know that adherence to Vatican Council II and the Catechism does not put them at odds with Tradition.
Archbishop Thomas E.Gullickson says Vatican Council II does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors
Implicit intention, invincible ignorance and a good conscience (LG 16) in Vatican Council II do not contradict extra ecclesiam nulla salus –John Martigioni

Muller-Fellay doctrinal deadlock : stuck on the ' visible dead ' issue