Sunday, January 31, 2016

Download the truth on the Baltimore Catechism error

Church Militant TV (CMTV) program Download-Tradition Under Fire 1 was interesting and entertaining but superficial.CMTV keeps avoiding the real issue as to why there is  break with Tradition in the Church.Participants presented a positive picture when they all agreed that Pope Benedict XVI has ushered in a quiet revolution back to Tradition with the personal Ordinariate for the Anglicans and then  the 2007 Summorum Pontificum.CMTV  has once again not mentioned that Pope Benedict gave us the traditional liturgy without the old ecclesiology.He gave us the old Mass with a new theology.
The CMTV  panel  says now  the TLM  has canonical  approval and does not depend on the liberal  bishops, for permission.False. The liberal bishops still will not permit the old Mass with the old ecclesiology.CMTV itself will not be given permission to affirm the old ecclesiology. The Archbishop of Detroit and the Jewish Left would object.Pope Francis would call it 'ideological'.The pope would also consider  the Novus  Ordo Mass ideological if the old ecclesiology was affirmed.
Related image
Vatican Council II has to be interpreted with the irrational premise ( non Catholics are physically visible and known in Heaven) and inference ( they are objective exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the old ecclesiology). This premise and inference from the Baltimore Catechism was not discussed. It is as if the panel did not know of this Baltimore Catechism error and the link to the new ecclesiology and a non traditional interpretation of Vatican Council II.An important point with reference to Tradition, or even the New Ordo Mass, which would change the direction of the subject was left out.
CMTV affirms the new ecclesiology which is a break with Tradition.Like the Baltimore catechism, they assume that the baptism of desire is 1) a known and physically visible baptism like the baptism of water. 2) The effects of the baptism of desire is that of the baptism of water.It is as if they knew or could know of a particular case now in Heaven saved as such.
The 'desire for the baptism of water ', which is theoretical for all of us and 'the catechuman who dies before receiving it', is a hypothetical case.Yet CMTV treats it as if it is objective.
 It is objective like the baptism of water, for them.So the CMTV panel's theology says these cases are exceptions to the old ecclesiology. This is the new theology accepted by Michael Voris.It is magisterial  according to Pope Benedict  XVI. It's also non traditional and heretical for a discerning Catholic.
This was the theology  of the recent Vatican Document on dialogue with the Jews which was not commented upon by CMTV or even the SSPX.
The new theology, attached to the Traditional Latin Mass, comes from the false premise and inference.The error was there in the Baltimore Catechism and it has influenced CMTV's interpretation of Vatican Council II.The removal of the old ecclesiology, at the centre of Tradition, was effected with the Baltimore Catechism and then the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.The Americans did it!
Could the Americans at CMTV now expose the error and bring the Church back to Tradition?
There are so many ways CMTV could approach this issue.
See the conversation  between Ross Douthat 2 and Fr. James Martin S.J.The irrational premise and inference from the Baltimore Catechism was used to interpret Vatican Council II.
Notice how the SSPX rejects the new theology and does not know that it is based on the Baltimore error. They can only interpret Vatican Council II with the Baltimore reasoning. The sedevacantists do the same.
See how Wikipedia assumes Lumen Gentium 16 is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.In other words, LG 16 refers to an objective case, like an  'objective' baptism of desire.In this way it becomes an exception.
All the Catholic encyclopedias have accepted  the theology of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.It assumes that the baptism of desire is objective like the baptism of water and so contradicts the Feeneyite, traditional interpretation of EENS.Is this rational?
The USCCB Doctrinal Committee under Cardinal Donald Wuerl, told Fr. Peter C.Phan  that all need to believe in Jesus for salvation and that the Church was necessary except for those saved with the baptism of desire or in invincible ignorance (the church was not necessary for this categoy. They knew of a few people who did not have to become formal members of the Catholic Church.) It is as if the USCCB knew of someone in the USA who is in Heaven without the baptism of water and so membership in the Church, after all,  was not necessary for some .Of course the USCCB liberals were in line with the Baltimore Catechism.
Related image
Michael Voris, once asked the liberal Fr.Jonathan Morris on a Vortex progam, who among us today does not need to enter the Church for salvation. The CMTV panel could ask this question with reference to the Baltimore Catechism.How could they at Baltimore, know of someone who did not need to enter the Church with 'faith and baptism' ? How could they know of someone saved with the baptism of desire and without the baptism of water ? They could not !
Ask this question with reference to the Baltimore Catechism, the Boston Case, the Ross Douthat and Fr.James Martin S.J conversation, SSPX and Vatican Council II, USCCB and Fr.Peter C.Phan, Wikipedia and the Catholic Encyclopedias, Catechism/Religion classes  at Michigan's Catholic schools...
I am sure the CMTV staff understand what I have said here.Will they be ready to bring this issue out in the open or will it be too controversial for them.
 The Download discussion remains, superficial, and even hypocritical if this issue is being intentionally not discussed. It is promoting a lie. 3 It is avoiding the real issue with reference to Catholic Tradition, which would make telephone and cell phones ring and buzz all over the world,if it was taken up.
-Lionel Andrades


Vatican Council II is 'hate' without an irrationality used in the interpretation : Fr. James Martin S.J will not affirm this Council
Ross Douthat needed to tell Fr.James Martin S.J that it is only with the use of an irrationality to interpret Vatican Council II that the Council 'develops doctrine'
Possibly Prof. Massimo Faggioli thinks Fr.S.Visintin, Dean of Theology at St.Anselm, Rome is a 'criminal' and does not know theology, like Ross Douthat
The text of Vatican Council II as it stands today does not contradict the dogma EENS.Dignitatis Humane does not contradict the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.The Council can be interpreted with Cushingism or Feeneyism.The conclusion is different


Petition needed calling attention to public lie

JUNE 4, 2014

Fischer More College and the Franciscans of the Immaculate have to accept these lies to be allowed the Traditional Latin Mass

Pope Francis, Cardinal Muller and Cardinal Ladaria are refusing to interpret Vatican Council II without the irrationality

Fr.Marco Hausmann FSSP in Rome says there are no exceptions while the Vicariate is teaching young lay Catholics that there are exceptions

When will Fr. Sabino Ardito SDB make an announcement on the Franciscans of the Immaculate doctrinal issue ?

The FSSP priests are not teaching the truths of the Catholic Faith for political reasons. They are teaching a lie.So what do we do ? We do not discuss it since they are priests?