Friday, September 4, 2015
Why does the Commissar want Fr.Settimo Manelli F.I and Franciscans of the Immaculate to violate common sense and fundamental premises held by man ?
For example, they are not obliged to interpret Vatican Council II as a break with the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS), when there are no known exceptions to EENS in 2015 and neither can there ever be exceptions for us human beings.
So they are not obliged to say Vatican Council II mentions exceptions to EENS , when LG 16 etc cannot be explicit in our reality.
They must not be forced to create a new theology based on an irrational inference i.e LG 16, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to objectively known cases in our time (2015).
Even Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate(F.I) priests who offer only the Novus Ordo Mass should not be expected to promote all this nonsense in the name of allegiance to the pope or something else.
Similarly the F.I priests who offer only the TLM should not be asked to accept the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston which suggested that there was salvation outside the Church.Humanly speaking no one at that time could know of any one saved outside the Church.Neither were there any such cases known in pre-1949 times.
With this irrationality a new ecclesiology is created and the F.I priests are not obliged to follow it.
How can people in Heaven known only to God and saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance be exceptions on earth to the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS. The Holy Office 1949 and the Archbishop of Boston clearly made a factual error.It is a fact of life that we cannot see or know people in Heaven.
This error was a break with the understanding of Church associated with the TLM before the Baltimore Catechism (1808) was issued.
How could the Baltimore Catechism suggest 1) implicit desire for the baptism of water by a catechumenen who dies before receiving it and 2) martyrdom, were baptisms, like the baptism of water? The baptism of water is seen and repeatable while the baptism of desire and blood cannot be given. They are unknown to us and known only to God.How can they be considered baptisms when they don't exist in our reality and we do not know of a single case.
So why must the Franciscans of the Immaculate who offer only the TLM have to accept three known baptisms instead of one? The Nicene Creed says there is only one baptism.
With all this irrationality making up the new ecclesiology the Franciscan priests along with Fr.Stefano Mannelli F.I, the founder of the community, will have to proclaim Jesus without the necessity of the Church for salvation( similar to the Protestants).They will have to proclaim the Kingdom of God without the necessity of Catholic Faith and the baptism of water(AG 7,LG 14). This is contrary to Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14 ) and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
Why must Fr.Settimo Mannelli F.I, the former Rector of the seminary at Santa Maria di Nazareth, Boccea, which Pope Francis closed down,have to accept all this irrational reasoning and theology.All this is a new ecclesiology and a break with the traditional ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.The traditional ecclesiology did not violate common sense and fundamental premises held by man, like, us not being able to see people in Heaven while we are on earth.-Lionel Andrades
It is un-ethical to knowingly have this taught to young seminarians of the Franciscans of the Immaculate
The Franciscans of the Immaculate seminarians at Tiburtina,Rome under the Commissar Fr.Sabino Ardito SDB have to interpret LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 etc in Vatican Council II as referring to explicit instead of implicit cases. They have to consider these cases as being visible instead of invisible for us in Rome in 2015. This is contrary to common sense.It is un-ethical to knowingly have this taught to young seminarians.
They may cite popes and catechisms but the end result is still the same - LG 16 ( invincible ignorance) cannot be visible instead of invisible, it cannot be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
The Friars have not heard of the dogma EENS and they believe the baptism of desire cases are visible in real life.
The political Left does not want the Church to teach the traditional exclusivist salvation teachings but it cannot accomplish this goal, by having seminarians learn irrationality and nonsense as premises, on which to base their reasoning.
Pope Francis has still not given the Franciscans of the Immaculate seminarians a proper seminary building in Rome
I spent August at the church Santa Maria di Nazareth, Boccea,Rome helping the gardner Giovanni.This month re-starts my Italian lessons. So I may not be able to give the same amont of time at the church.
It was nice seeing the Friars the other day , pack themself in two wagons and go to Florence. It's three hours by road from Rome.They were back the same day from the community-house there.Among the friars who went to Florence were Italian and African seminarians.A few of the Franciscans of the Immaculate seminarians live here at Boccea while the rest of them live at Tibertina, Rome.
Pope Francis has still not given them a proper seminary building in Rome.
In late October, I could have to change my residence and go to another parish.
We celebrated the feast day of Pope Saint Pius X, the great anti-modernist Pope who really contributed to modernism and heresy in the Catholic Church when he overlooked a statement made in the Baltimore Catechism of 1808.
The pope who gave us Lamentabilli and Pascendi and the Oath Against Modernism overlooked the Baltimore Catechism suggesting that there were three baptisms and 1) being saved with implicit desire for the baptism of water for a catechumen who dies before receiving it and also 2) martyrdom, were baptisms like the baptism of water.
The baptism of desire(BOD) and the baptism of blood(BOB) were accepted in the Catechisms of Pope Pius X and no one clarified that BOD and BOB were not visible and repeatable like the baptism of water. They could not be administered and they were unknown to us and known only to God. Also they could be followed by the baptism of water.He let the confusion persist.
BOD and BOB were not related to the Neccesity of the Baptism of Water for all. Yet in the Baltimore Catechism and then in the Catechism of Pope Pius X they were placed in the section on baptism.
We do not know any case of a person being saved without the baptism of water and they were placed in the baptism section as if they were relevant and were exceptions.
Modernists used this error to discard the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
The baptism of desire and blood were considered baptisms during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII and Fr.Leonard Feeney was not defended.This was the Holy Office 1949 promoting modernism.It was the magisterium which was teaching a new doctrine and heresy.
Then being saved in invincible ignorance and with implicit desire is mentioned in Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14).It is placed along with orthodox passages which support the dogma saying all need faith and baptism.Why was BOD,BOB and being saved in invincible ignorance placed in Vatican Council II? Since it was assumed that these cases were explicit and so were exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation.Invisible for us cases were considered to be explicit. This is an irrational premise. Then these explicit cases of BOD, BOB and I.I were inferred to be exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation.
This is all modernism and it is magisterial today.Pius X like the other popes contributed to it.