Friday, January 8, 2016

How do we know there is a catechumen saved with the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water, since this is not a dogmatic teaching and no one has seen this particular catechumen?


Related image

Lionel,

You said "the Church does not say that anyone on earth has this gift of being able to see somone saved in Heaven
without the baptism of water and with the baptism of desire."  But neither does the Church say that anyone on earth has the ability to see someone in Heaven who received the baptism of water.  Since you are questioning (or denying) that anyone has been saved by BOD based on the fact that you have not actually seen it occur, why would you believe anyone has been saved with the actual baptism of water, since you haven't see this occur either?  
Lionel:
Yes since it is physically not possible to see such a case.So the baptism of desire not being explicit physically cannot be an exception to the dogma which says all need the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
________________

But neither does the Church say that anyone on earth has the ability to see someone in Heaven who received the baptism of water. 
Lionel:
Yes the Church does not state this but in  faith, according to the dogma, the Church does state that the baptism of water is necessary for a person to go to Heaven as compared to a person who is not baptised with water in the Church.
This is said in the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and Vatican Council II (AG 7, LG 14).
________________

 Since you are questioning (or denying) that anyone has been saved by BOD based on the fact that you have not actually seen it occur, why would you believe anyone has been saved with the actual baptism of water, since you haven't see this occur either?  
Lionel:
I am not questioning the possibility of someone being saved with the baptism of desire with or without the baptism of water and this being known only to God,
I am saying that these cases cannot be physically known to us, we cannot name someone in Heaven this year for example, saved as such. So these cases should not be considered as exceptions to the teaching on all needing to be formal members of the Catholic Church to go to Heaven.
I believe that someone will be saved with the baptism of water in the Church, since this is the teaching of the Church.I can also physically see the baptism of water being administered.I cannot see any one receiving the baptism of desire.

After 1949 'the Church' teaches that the baptism of desire is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, contradicting the pre Council of Trent teaching on this subject.The present magisterium contradicts the centuries old magisterium.So I ask the present magisterium  where are the physically visible cases of someone saved with the baptism of desire ? Who are these persons, what are their names, where did they live? Who has seen them in Heaven? How could he(the viewer) know someone was saved outside the Church? How could any human say there is an exception, how would he know? How do we know there is a catechumen saved with the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water, since this is not a dogmatic teaching and no one has seen this particular catechumen? How can we infer in general that there are persons saved with the baptism of desire and always without the baptism of water? 
-Lionel Andrades

Don't evangelise like Fr.John Zuhlsdorf : he interprets Vatican Council II with Cushingism instead of Feeneyism

TLM: Evangelize or else close and die.

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2016/01/tlm-evangelize-or-else-close-and-die/



Fr.Zuhlsdorf defends not giving the Eucharist to Lutherans , but does this without any reference to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/11/frzuhlsdorf-defends-not-giving.html

Father Z didn't notice the mistake in Lumen Gentium
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/11/father-z-didnt-notice-mistake-in-lumen.html



Fr.John Zuhlsdorf is in material heresy

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/10/frjohn-zuhlsdorf-is-in-material-heresy.html

Fr.John Zuhlsdorf and Michael Voris remain politically correct

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/09/according-to-fr.html

Fr.John Zuhlsdorf repeats Marchetti's error on the baptism of blood

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/04/frjohn-zuhlsdorf-repeats-marchettis.html



 
Fr.John Zuhlsdorf interprets Vatican Council II with Marchetti's theory so the Council for him is ambigous and a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/frjohn-zuhlsdorf-interprets-vatican.html

 February 3, 2015
Rorate Caeili and Fr.Zuhlsdorf's interpretations are politically correct
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/rorate-caeili-and-frzuhlsdorfs.html

Fr.John Zuhlsdorf does not believe in the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus : advice on interfaith marriages

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/03/frjohn-zuhlsdorf-does-not-believe-in.html


Extra ecclesiam nulla salus is linked to Vatican Council II. Louie Verrechio and Fr.Zuhlsdorf have still to discover it.
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/extra-ecclesiam-nulla-salus-is-linked.html


Fr.John Zuhlsdorf made an objective mistake : irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2015/02/frjohn-zuhlsdorf-made-objective-mistake.html


Fr.John Zuhlsdorf interprets Vatican Council II with Marchetti's theory so the Council for him is ambigous and a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus - 2 

http://eucharistandssion.blogspot.it/2015/02/frjohn-zuhlsdorf-interprets-vatican_8.html

Fr.John Zuhlsdorf interprets Vatican Council II with Marchetti's theory so the Council for him is ambigous and a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus - 3



The Catholic Church does not state that someone in 1949 or 1960-65 had the physical ability to see a person in Heaven saved without the baptism of water :so where is the baptism of desire case ?

Also explain what you understand by the term baptism of desire. What do you think that phrase means?
Lionel:
The baptism of desire for me refers to the hypothetical case of a catechumen who wishes to receive the baptism of water but dies before he does so.It is speculated that he will go to Heaven.

Yes for me this is a possibility and of course since he is in Heaven he will have received the baptism of water in the Catholic Church in a manner known only to God.

I personally have not seen or known a baptism of desire case with or without the baptism of water and the Church does not say that any one on earth has this gift of being able to see someone saved in Heaven without the baptism of water and with the baptism of desire.
The Church does not state that someone in 1949 or 1960-65 had the physical ability to see such a person in Heaven i.e saved without the baptism of water in the Church, saved outside the Church.So there are no physically known cases of this hypothetical case.-Lionel Andrades

No alla legge 194 … ma si all’aborto, in alcuni casi

No alla legge 194 … ma si all’aborto, in alcuni casi

aborto-NO-194
L’avvocato Pietro Guerini, presidente del Comitato NO 194, ha elaborato una proposta di legge sull’aborto sostitutiva della 194, norma integralmente iniqua in vigore dal 1978 e direttamente responsabile della morte di milioni e milioni di esseri umani innocenti. Attraverso un comunicato ufficiale apparso sul sito internet del Comitato, si legge che l’avvocato Guerini ha ricevuto l’incarico da un senatore di redigere il testo di un disegno di legge che riproduca le posizioni abrogazioniste del comitato stesso rispetto alla 194, testo che lo stesso presidente Guerini presenterà in Senato entro la fine dell’anno in corso. Un evento storico, sottolinea Guerini, che rappresenta un importante avallo dell’operazione referendaria portata avanti dal Comitato da egli diretto e che reintrodurrebbe il reato di aborto volontario in Italia.
All’articolo 2  del testo in questione si legge però: “L’aborto volontario è consentito solo nel caso di grave pericolo per la vita della donna che porti a termine la gravidanza o affronti il parto, grave pericolo che deve essere accertato e rigorosamente documentato da una commissione composta da tre medici, nessuno dei quali dipendente o collaboratore della struttura sanitaria scelta dalla donna per l’eventuale interruzione di gravidanza, ed escludendo dall’accertamento qualsiasi analisi inerente un ipotetico suicidio della stessa. Ogni altra ipotesi di aborto volontario è vietata (…) lo Stato riconosce a tutti gli operatori sanitari il diritto all’obiezione di coscienza, eccetto il caso che il loro intervento sia indispensabile per salvare la vita della donna in imminente pericolo, in linea con il dettato del comma 5 dell’art. 9 dell’abrogata legge 194/78.
Nel manifesto di presentazione dell’iniziativa referendaria abrogativa della 194, si evince che essa “è finalizzata all’abrogazione della legge (dall’entrata in vigore della quale si sono registrati oltre 5 milioni di aborti, secondo i dati ufficiali del Ministero della Salute) e rigetta ogni ipotesi di trattativa, che sarebbe inconcepibilmente effettuata sulla pelle del nostro prossimo”. Eppure, la proposta di legge dell’avvocato Guerini non sembra andare nella direzione di una totale abrogazione della legge 194, tanto che, oltre ad ammettere la possibilità dell’aborto in alcuni casi, essa prevede (e limita) lo stesso diritto all’obiezione di coscienza di tutti gli operatori sanitari, diritto che non avrebbe senso menzionare né tanto meno disciplinare nel caso di una norma integralmente giusta ed equa. 
Il progetto di legge del Comitato NO194 purtroppo non sembra far altro che confermare, di fatto ed in linea di principio, la liceità dell’omicidio volontario dell’innocente, seppur a determinate condizioni … (A.D.M.)
http://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/notizie-brevi/no-alla-legge-194-ma-si-allaborto-in-alcuni-casi/

QUAL E’ LA DIFFERENZA TRA ANTIABORTISMO GIURIDICAMENTE ATTREZZATO E PRO LIFE MERAMENTE PROPAGANDISTICO

http://no194.org/


http://www.radiospada.org/2015/10/video-lavv-guerini-parla-di-aborto-e-difesa-dei-valori-cattolici-milano-10-ottobre-2015-corteo-no194/

Aborto: basta una foto per svelare il tragico inganno

Aborto: basta una foto per svelare il tragico inganno

aborto
Un’immagine nitida. Troppo nitida. E chiara. Al punto da render evidente a tutti il fatto d’esser di fronte ad un essere umano a tutti gli effetti. Ed è questo che la rivista Elle trova semplicemente insopportabile. Specie essendo l’aborto uno dei temi fondamentali, su cui si giocherà la campagna elettorale per le prossime presidenziali Usa.
Così il periodico femminile («e femminista», come giustamente ha fatto notare l’agenziaReinformation.tv, che ha ripreso la notizia) ha lanciato i suoi strali contro un’altra testata storica, Newsweek, “colpevole”, a suo giudizio, d’aver pubblicato in copertina la foto di un feto nell’utero materno, «somigliante più ad un bambino che ad una vera gravidanza», osservaElle. Troppo «somigliante». Confondendo, nella sua cieca foga ideologica, i piani: poiché, certo, la gravidanza è uno stato, funzionale tuttavia ad un preciso contenuto, il bimbo come creatura in sé considerata. Che, nel caso specifico di quella prima pagina, potrebbe avere tra le 12 e le 14 settimane, più o meno il tempo limite consentito per la pratica abortiva, tema affrontato, in effetti, da Newsweek. Ma con un taglio ritenuto politicamente “scorretto”, cioè «umanizzando il feto e cancellando la madre incinta», come lamenta la giornalista Sady Doyle su Elle.
Una giovane, che ha patito un aborto spontaneo appena oltre la dodicesima settimana, ha messo on line la foto di suo figlio, per sensibilizzare le donne a favore della vita, prendendo coscienza di cosa, anzi di chi realmente abbiano in grembo: un essere umano, una persona, a tutti gli effetti. Il sito naitreetgrandir ha proposto una serie di immagini, che ritraggono il bimbo dall’inizio della gravidanza in poi. Cancellando ogni residuo dubbio.
La reazione isterica di Elle ha, di contro, mostrato quanto la lobby abortista, per far breccia, sia disposta anche ad occultare la realtà, ad indorare la pillola, ad evitare la vera questione, quella relativa all’umanità oggettiva propria dell’embrione. Che non le interessa. Preferisce il profitto. Sulla pelle dei nascituri. E delle loro madri (M.F.).
http://www.corrispondenzaromana.it/notizie-brevi/aborto-basta-una-foto-per-svelare-il-tragico-inganno/
___________________________________________________
L'aborto uccide i bambini.
        Si può avere un aborto qui.

9 Week Abortion (01)


10 Week Abortion (11)


22 Week Abortion (01)


http://www.abortionno.org/abortion-photos/


It's over a week and Italian newspapers have still not reported the thousands of Italian babies killed through abortion in local hospitals in 2015

Image result for Photos of Pope Francis meets Italian president
11 Week Abortion (02)
8 Week Abortion (05)
There were over 1,00,000 Italian babies who were killed in  abortions in Italy last year and the newspapers have still not mentioned it this week or in their December 31,2015 issue. Instead there have been so many reports about immigrant babies killed in the Mediterranean seas or during war.
The abortions were carried out in  public hospitals and was free for women who have an Italian health card. There are no special abortion clinics in Italy.
Italy has one of the most liberal abortion laws and now over 1,00,000 Italian babies are killed annually and this is not being reported by the mainline Italian newspapers.
Even the daily newspaper of the Italian bishops conference, Avvenire, has reports from Dec.31, 2015 to Jan. 3,2016 on infants being lost at sea by immigrants but nothing about the infants legally murdered in Italian society.
22 Week Abortion (02)

Avvenire has a statement by the Italian President and Pope Francis affirming their commitment to immigration, mentioning specifically babies killed but there is nothing about the annual loss of over 1,00,000 Italian infants, through abortions in hospitals and the use of abortificient drugs.
The Avvenire correspondent mentioned 700 immigrant babies killed in 2015 but nothing about the hundreds of thousands of babies killed in the womb of a mother with the use of pincers and other surgical instruments.
-Lionel Andrades

24 Week Abortion

ITALY. Law No. 194 of 22 May 1978 on the social protection of motherhood and the voluntary termination of pregnancy. (Gazzetta Uficialee della Repubblica Italiana, Part I, 2 May 1978, No. 140, pp. 3642-3646).
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/population/abortion/Italy.abo.htm

26 Week Abortion

Italy Adopts New Law Providing Free Abortions
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2947539?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Termination of Pregnancy and Abortion in Italy

http://rome.angloinfo.com/information/healthcare/pregnancy-birth/termination-abortion/


Pope Francis, Sergio Mastarella and Avvenire : immigrant babies are important but Italian babies are not http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/01/pope-francis-sergio-mastarella-and.html




http://www.abortionno.org/abortion-photos/




The theology mentioned in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, is meaningless and does not apply.In a way they kind of duped all of us, including me


Lionel, where does the Church teach that those "invisible" cases of people of people having been infused with the supernatural virtues cannot be saved unless they become formal members of the Church.
Please answer this question directly. If you cannot do so, then your distinction is contrived.
Lionel:
I know you are sincere but you still have not understood what I am saying.I am not useing the familiar apologetics of the SBC-SSPX on this subject.I am asking you to step aside from theology for a second, since the theology mentioned in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949, is meaningless and does not apply.
In a way they kind of duped all of us, including me.
There is no physical case of the baptism of desire.
There is no known case of the baptism of desire.
We cannot meet ot see any one saved with the baptism of desire.
Yet they have created a theology over this non existent case.
There are all sorts of theological speculation of a case which does not exist.
There is no connection between the theology of the Letter(1949) and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
All that theology is fine in itself it is rational and acceptable but the moment it is placed in relation to EENS it is meaningless.It has nothing to do with EENS.

For example 'God can infuse the virtue of faith in someone's soul...without that person being on the formal membership roster of a parish'.Yes. Wonderful. Acceptable. But your not saying this has any connection with EENS?
It has not connection.
Since a theoretical case cannot be an objective exception to all needing to be fomal members of the Church for salvation.
To be an exception some one has to exist.
The magisterium did not notice this . They overlooked this error in 1949. Then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger carried over this error onto  many Church documents e.g Redemptoris Missio.
 




 



Lionel, where does the Church teach that those "invisible" cases of people of people having been infused with the supernatural virtues cannot be saved unless they become formal members of the Church.
Please answer this question directly. If you cannot do so, then your distinction is contrived.
Lionel:
Now lets look at this in the theological mode.
The Church on the contrary teaches that those invisible for us cases having been infused with the supernatural virtues can be saved without becoming formal members of the Church.
The Church suggests there are exceptions.This is there in the Catechism of the Catholic Church etc. CCC 1257 says God is not limited to the Sacraments.
So in itself this speculation on a case unknown to anyone in particular, in the Church over the centuries, is not controversial.It is an opionion, a view, a theology.
The irrationality comes in when it is assumed that this case is explicit, objectively seen this year.
This happens when this theology is put forward as an exception to the traditional interpretation of EENS.
If it is an exception, then it is a known case.
(But how can it be a known case when the person is Heaven and not on earth!)
So indirectly it is being said that this theology refers to a known case. Otherwise why would it be mentioned with  reference to EENS?
For example God is not limited to the Sacraments. This is acceptable.
Who is going to argue with this? No one.It makes sense. God is all knowing and all powerful and so He is not limited to the Sacraments, if he chooses not to limit himself.
But this line is placed in CCC 1257 which says the Church knows of no means to eternal beatitude other than the baptism of water.God has limited salvation to the baptism of water in the Catholic Church! This is the message here.
So in CCC 1257 the Church is saying God has limited salvation to the baptism of water and it also suggests God is not limited to the Sacraments since there are known exceptions! If it is not referring to a known case then then why is it mentioned here?
It is mentioned since it was assumed that his line refers to a known case.
The baptism of desire ( with or without the baptism of water) refers to a known case.
Being saved in invincible ignorance refers to a known case for the magisterium after 1949.
Theoretical, hypothetical cases which would only be known to God are known cases for the magisterium.

_____________________________


Please answer this question directly. If you cannot do so, then your
distinction is contrived.

Lionel:
When the Church mentions the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance( AG 7, LG 14 for example ) it implies that ' these "invisible" cases of people having been infused with the supernatural virtues" can be saved without becoming formal members of the Church.This is implied when this inference is placed in relation with EENS or orthodox passages in Vatican Council II, for example, which support EENS( AG 7,LG 14 i.e all need faith and baptism for salvation).

__________________

'that those "invisible" cases of people of people having been infused
with the supernatural virtues cannot be saved unless they become formal members of the Church.'
Lionel:
The Church since 1949 does not say all need to be formal members of the Church since the magisterium assumes there are known exceptions to the dogma EENS.
So now magisterial documents like Dominus Iesus use Cushingism as a theology and not Feeneyism.
-Lionel Andrades