Monday, February 1, 2016

Pope Francis' joint ecumenical commemoration of the Reformation is possible theologically for Catholics since the Baltimore Catechism infers there is known salvation outside the Church, a person can be saved without the baptism of water

Pope Francis will travel to the Swedish city of Lund on October 31st for a joint commemoration of the Reformation with leaders of the Lutheran World Federation - ANSARelated image
 
Pope Francis will go to Lund, Sweden for  a joint ecumenical commemoration of the start of the Reformation, together with leaders of the Lutheran World Federation and representatives of other Christian Churches.This is possible theologically for Catholics  since the Baltimore Catechism infers there is known salvation outside the Church, a person can be saved without the baptism of water.
This was the new theology used in the Balamand Declaration.It was also the theology of the International Theological Commission under Pope Benedict and Cardinal Luiz Ladaria S.J.One of the ITC papers they approved, proposes a 'theology of religions'. At the same time,in a kind of a double-speak,  Cardinal Ratzinger also issued a CDF Notification on Fr.Jacques Dupuis S.J against the theology of religions. Perhaps Pope John Paul II asked him to do so.
Now Pope Francis permits  a new department at the Gregorian Pontifical University called 'The Department of the Theology of Religions' which is under the Rector and another Jesuit priest.This is a contradiction with the Magisterium of Pope John  Paul II. One magisterium against under another. Surely at one of these two times the magisterium was wrong.
All this was possible because of the breach made by the Baltimore Catechism.It inferred that there is a baptism of desire which is similar to the baptism of water( as if they would know)  and that every one does not need the baptism of water in the Catholic Church for salvation, because of these 'known exceptions'.
It is a fact of life that we do not know any of these exceptions. We cannot physically see people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.
So there is a theology, a new ecumenism, based on this factual error in the Baltimore Catechism.-Lionel Andrades
 

The Baltimore Catechism error is not just a theoretical oversight it had practical consequences, penalites were placed on Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center. There was an excommunication.

Now that we have detected the error and have found the Missing Link, we have to change our way of looking at Vatican Council II. There is a different perspective now but it really is the old one .This is the 'mind-shift' we have to make.
Related image 
Without the Baltimore Catechism error, the Jesuits and the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Cushing were in heresy and not Fr. Leonard Feeney.Now all the Catholic Encyclopedias irrationally assume Fr.Leonard Feeney was in heresy.
  
Some Catholics may say the Magisterium cannot make a mistake and even if the Baltimore Catechism (1891) made a minor mistake it does not change the Faith.
I tell them that it may seem a minor mistake but there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II.So the faith is not the same.This is a major shift in theology.The result is the difference between heresy and faith.
There is now a rational and irrational intepretation of Vatican Council II. These are two different faiths.
With the Baltimore Catechism error the present Magisterium is a break with the pre- Council of Trent Magisterium.So again the faith is different.
The Baltimore Catechism error is not only theoretical it had other practical consequences.There were penalites placed on Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center. There was an excommunication.
Without the Baltimore Catechism error, the Jesuits and the Archbishop of Boston Cardinal Cushing were in heresy and not Fr. Leonard Feeney.Now all the Catholic Encyclopedias irrationally assume the heresy was with Fr.Leonard Feeney.
The magisterium in Boston and Rome were using the irrational premise and inference which comes from the Baltimore Catechism.IThe error was then inserted in Vatican Council II. Hypothetical references to salvation in Vatican Council II are interpreted as being objectively seen and personally known. It was a mistake mentioning the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance in the text of Vatican Council II. Those who inserted these references in Vatican Council II were assuming these cases, now in Heaven are invisible for all of u. They were supposed to be objective and personally known on earth.But where is the baptism of desire case on earth ? Who can name any one saved without the baptism of water in the present times ? Where does he or she live?
Who could have seen such a case in the past? Who had the physical ability to do so at Baltimore? So how could they say that the 'the desire for the baptism of water by an unknown catechuman, had to exclude the baptism of water?
How could they go back in time and interpret the saints and popes as saying 'the desire', was 1) a baptism like the baptism of water ? How could they physically verify this? Then how could they infer that these invisible cases were exceptions to the dogma EENS. The citations of the popes and saints on 'the desire' do not say that it is baptism like the baptism of water or that it is an explicit exception to EENS. It was only after the Baltimore Catechism and Boston Archdioces wrong inference, that the saints and popes were interpreted with the irrational premise and inference on the baptism of desire.
We cannot any more say that the Magisterium cannot make a mistake.Human beings can be influenced by Satan.The Freemasons could have placed the error in the Baltimore Catechism thinking a hundred years ahead.
The pope is infallible ex cathedra and the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus is an infallible teaching.Yet  with the Baltmore Catechism and the 1949 Letter to the Archbishop of Boston the dogma EENS was changed and then discarded.A new theology was created based on the Baltimore-Boston  irrationality.It was approved by Rome. It was a magisterial heresy.
Now it is being said that Vatican Council II has brought in a revolution into the Church, yes, only when the Council is interpreted with an irrational premise and inference.Then there  is  a  non traditional conclusion.The breech with Tradition was made at Baltimore.
Otherwise Vatican Council II is Feeneyite and there are no visible cases of salvation in Heaven without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. To say there are such cases is the false premise  and then to assume these 'ghosts' cannot be exceptions to the dogma EENS is the  false inference.
Since there cannot be known salvation outside the Church there is nothing in Vatican Council II to contradict the old ecclesiology, which is based on 'the rigorist interpretation' of the dogma EENS.
Now that we have detected the error and have  found the Missing Link, we have to change our way of looking at Vatican Council II. There is a different perspective now but it really is the old one .This is the 'mind-shift' we have to make.
-Lionel Andrades
FROM THE BALTIMORE CATECHISM.
BAPTISM.
Q. 650. What is Baptism of desire?

A. Baptism of desire is an ardent wish to receive Baptism, and to do all that God has ordained for our salvation.
Q. 651. What is Baptism of blood?
A. Baptism of blood is the shedding of one's blood for the faith of Christ.
Q. 652. What is the baptism of blood most commonly called?
A. The baptism of blood is most commonly called martyrdom, and those who receive it are called martyrs. It is the death one patiently suffers from the enemies of our religion, rather than give up Catholic faith or virtue. We must not seek martyrdom, though we must endure it when it comes.
Q. 653. Is Baptism of desire or of blood sufficient to produce the effects of Baptism of water?
A. Baptism of desire or of blood is sufficient to produce the effects of the Baptism of water, if it is impossible to receive the Baptism of water.
(How did they know? Who saw or met someone saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church?
They assume these are objective cases. They mix up what is invisible as being visible, hypothetical as being objectively seen)
Q. 654. How do we know that the baptism of desire or of blood will save us when it is impossible to receive the baptism of water?
A. We know that baptism of desire or of blood will save us when it is impossible to receive the baptism of water, from Holy Scripture, which teaches that love of God and perfect contrition can secure the remission of sins ; and also that Our Lord promises salvation to those who lay down their life for His sake or for His teaching.
(Yes, theoretically, hypothetically, as a possibility known only to God.So why is it mentioned here with reference to all needing the baptism of water with no exceptions?
It is mentioned here since it is inferred that the baptism of desire refers to a known case.)
http://www.baltimore-catechism.com/lesson14.htm