Monday, July 3, 2017

ITALIAN PRIEST CENSORED, OUSTED FOR CRITICISM OF PRO-GAY POLITICIAN

ITALIAN PRIEST CENSORED, OUSTED FOR CRITICISM OF PRO-GAY POLITICIAN

NEWS: WORLD NEWS

by Juliana Freitag  •  ChurchMilitant.com  •  July 1, 2017    
Italian newspaper Libero, in light of the recent suspension of one of its journalists, decided to revive last year's dispute between Fr. Livio Fanzaga and the Order of Journalists, exposing the vulnerability of freedom of speech and religious liberty in Italy. 
 
Image
Fr. Livio Fanzaga, former director of Radio Maria Italy












Fanzaga, director of private Catholic radio station Radio Maria, used to host a news commentary show. In February 2016, amidst the heated debate regarding the soon-to-be-legalized gay civil unions bill, the priest spared no words for politician Monica Cirinnà, the Democratic Party senator who authored the bill.
"She reminds me of the woman from the 17th chapter of the book of Revelation," he remarked. "Now she's cheering her victory with Prosecco. ... Madam, one day a funeral will arrive for you, too. I hope it won't be for a really long time, but it'll arrive."
Cirinnà, a prominent LGBT rights activist, is acquainted with the legal mechanisms capable of silencing her enemies into oblivion. The very next day she complained to the government's Agency of Communications, as well as the Federal Journalists' Union, the Catholic Journalists Association, and the Order of Journalists, seeking their intervention. The Order eventually suspended Fanzaga for his statements, but the news of his punishment was only made public a few weeks ago by the discussion initiated by Libero
Falsely accused by the press of "wishing for the senator's death" and of calling Monica a "prostitute," Fr. Livio found himself having to explain Catholic exegesis to a bunch of secular bureaucrats. The priest, author of numerous theological books, clarified, "Whoever reads my writings knows that "Babylon" is how I refer to a world without God, as described by the novel Lord of the World, by Robert Benson. I meant that the bill proposed by the senator contributes to the construction of this type of world, where man takes the place of God."

Image
Monica Cirinnà, author of gay civil unions bill

In an interview with La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana, Fr. Livio claimed that "absurdly, I had to demonstrate, Bible in hand, that the word 'prostitute' means 'idolatrous.' ... I've shown them that I explain the meaning of this word in many of my books."
He went on, "For me, what's quite dangerous about this ordeal is that I had to discuss sacred texts with nonreligious people. These are not matters to be left to the expertise of [secular] tribunals, not at all."
The accused also attached to his defense copies of some of the interviews where he clarified his use of biblical allegory. Speaking with The Huffington Post, the priest explained, "Monica is a Catholic and she knows exactly what I meant. I reminded her of the Last Judgment ... that when we leave this world we will be held accountable for our works before the Lord."
His arguments failed to convince the Order of Journalists. Father Livio was sanctioned to six months without pay on the grounds of insufficient reasoning. "The explanations provided by Fanzaga are unfounded," the Order declared. "[H]e wishes for Cirinnà's death, even if in the far future."
The case that triggered Libero to remind Italians of the attacks on freedom of speech committed by the Order of Journalists was that of journalist Filippo Facci, currently defending himself from a two-month sanction that would also deprive him of his salary. Has atheist Facci quoted the Bible to admonish a politician? No. About a year ago, Facci wrote an article claiming he hates Islam.
"I hate Islam, all of Islam, the Muslims and their religion, more disgusting than all other religions," he wrote. "I hate their hatred that's forbidden to hate. ... I don't hate what is different: I hate Islam because my (our) history ... is the history of a slow, progressive, tireless opposition to everything Muslims say and do."
In a recent article about the litigation, Facci observed, "I hate all religions. ... I have written extremely harsh criticism against the Pope and the Vatican ... and for that I've never had problems with the Order."
The silence from the bishops or from the Vatican towards Fr. Fanzaga has been total. As observed by La Nuova Bussola Quotidiana, "[F]rom now on, whoever insists on standing up for the Truth ... knows that they'll be abandoned, if not attacked, by the shepherds who should be defending the flock."
https://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/italian-priest-censored-and-ousted-for-criticism-of-pro-gay-politician

The bottom line is that we are all reciting the Nicene Creed but there are two different interpretations


Hi,

I hope you are not mixing me up with the St.Benedict Centers, the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary. I am not using their apologetics.
The communities in the diocese of Worcester and Manchester USA would be making the same error as the FSSP with Vatican Council II.
The FSSP assumes the baptism of desire (BOD) and blood(BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) refer to known cases saved without the baptism of waterand so they are examples of salvation outside the Church.
The Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the communities of Fr.Leonard Feeney, also assume (LG 16( invincible ignorance) and the theoretical case of the catechumen who has the desire for the baptism of water but dies before he receives it (LG 14, AG 7 etc) are exceptions to the dogma EENS.So for them Vatican Council II is a rupture with Tradition.So their inference too, like the FSSP, is that LG 16 etc refer to visible cases in 2017. This is a false inference which produces a false conclusion.
On the Nicene Creed though the St. Benedict Centers are clear that there is only one baptism and it is the baptism of water. They affirm Feeneyite EENS.
However for the FSSP, the SSPX and the F.I (Franciscans of the Immaculate) there are three known baptisms( desire, blood and invincble ignorance).So there are exceptions to Feeneyite EENS with BOD, BOB and I.I for them. There are exceptions to the Nicene Creed when it states ' I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins'.
Ask them: Do you believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. They will say Yes.
Ask them : Are you referring to the baptism of water? They will say Yes.
Ask them : However you also believe there is salvation outside the Church without the baptism of water and with BOD, BOB and I.I? They will say.
Ask them: Is this not contradictory for you? They will say no, with a straight face.
Tell them: That I, Lionel, believe there is one baptism for the forgiveness of sins..There is only one known baptism, the baptism of water.
There are no known baptisms of BOD, BOB and I.I. This is physically not possibile. So there cannot be an exception to the dogma EENS or the NIcene Creed on baptism, for me.
For me, Lionel, there are no exceptions and for the FSSP and the SSPX and the F.I there are exceptions.For methere are no exceptions to 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' for the FSSP and the present magisterium of the Church there are.
So the magisterium like the FSSP have a different understanding, compared to me, of the Nicene Creed, EENS(with or without exceptions), Vatican Council ( with or without the irrational premise), the Catechism of the Catholic Church ( with or without the irrational premise) and the other Catechisms which mention invincible ignorance( with or without the premise).
The bottom line is that we are all reciting the Nicene Creed but there are two different interpretations.
One interpretation says there are no practical exceptions and the other says there are.
One is traditional and rational and the other is heretical and not rational.
So can the bishop make the Traditional Latin Mass available with FSSP priests, who like me, are traditional and rational when interpreting the Nicene Creed, Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents?
Can the bishop be shown the difference in the two interpretations, mine and all of theirs, and be asked to comment ?
How can lay people who attend the Traditional Latin Mass accept the irrational and non traditional version of the Nicene Creed when they have an option in my interpretation?
This is the stuff for a Canon Lawyer to take up with the bishop in Denver.
Would you know of a Canonist there in Denver with whom I can communicate?
-Lionel Andrades


We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us men and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate,
he suffered, died, and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in fulfillment of the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Catholic Apologetics with rational and traditional theology and doctrine : for stickers, pamphlets, adverts





















Italiano


Only the Catholic Church
-Lionel Andrades
Cattolic layman in  Roma
Blog: EucharistandMission
E-mail:lionelandrades10@gmail.com

TERMS EXPLAINED
Feeneyism: It is the old theology and philosophical reaoning which says there are no known exceptions past or present, to the dogma EENS.There are no explicit cases to contradict the traditional interpretation of EENS.
Cushingism: It is the new theology and philosophical reasoning, which assumes there are known exceptions, past and present, to the dogma EENS, on the need for all to formally enter the Church.It assumes that the baptism of desire etc are not hypothetical but objectively known.In principle hypothetical cases are objective in the present times.
Baptism of Desire (Feeneyite): It refers to the hypothetical case of an unknown catechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is saved. Since this is an invisible case in our reality it is not relevant to the dogma EENS.
Baptism of Desire (Cushingite): It refers to the known case of a catechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is saved. Since this is a visible case or the SSPX it is relevant to the dogma EENS.
Invincible Ignorance ( Feeneyite): This refers to the hypothetical case of someone allegedly saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since he was in ignorance.
Invincible Ignorance (Cushingite): This refers to the explicit case of someone allegedly saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since he was in ignorance.Since it is an exception to the dogma EENS it is assumed to be objectively known in particular cases.This reasoning is irrational.
Council of Florence: One of the three Councils which defined the dogma EENS.It did not mention any exceptions.It did not mention the baptism of desire. It was Feeneyite.
Liberal theologians: They reinterpreted the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, as objective cases, known in the present times.
Vatican Council II (Cushingite): It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Cushingism.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer not to hypothetical but known cases in the present times. So Vatican Council II emerges as a break with the dogma EENS.
Vatican Council II (Feeneyite): It refers to the interpretation of Vatican Council II with Feeneyism.LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to hypothetical cases, which are unknown personally in the present times.So Vatican Council II is not a break with EENS, the Syllabus of Errors, ecumenism of return, the Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite-one baptism),the teaching on the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation and the non separation of Church and State( since all need to convert into the Church to avoid Hell).
Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.: It assumed hypothetical cases were defacto known in the present times. So it presented the baptism of desire etc as an explicit exception, to the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS.It censured Fr.Leonard Feeney and the St.Benedict Center.Since they did not assume that the baptism of desire referred to a visible instead of invisible case.The Letter made the baptism of desire etc relevant to EENs.From the second part of this Letter has emerged the New Theology.
Letter of the Holy Office 1949 ( Feeneyite). It means accepting the Letter as Feeneyite based on the first part .It supports Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.The traditional interpretatiion of the dogma EENS does not mention any exceptions.
Letter of the Holy Office ( Cushingite). It is based on the second part of the Letter.It rejects the traditional interpretation of EENS. Since it considers the baptism of desire ( Cushingite-explicit) and being saved in invincible ignorance ( Cushingite-explicit cases) as being exceptions to EENS ( Feeneyite).It worngly assumes hypothetical cases are objectively visible and so they are exceptions to the first part of the Letter.
Baltimore Catechism: It assumed that the desire for the baptism of an unknown catechumen, who dies before receiving it and was saved, was a baptism like the baptism of water. So it was placed in the Baptism Section of the catechism. In other words it was wrongly assumed that the baptism of desire is visible and repeatable like the baptism of water or that we can administer it like the baptism of water.(The Baltimore Catechism is accepted with the confusion).
Catechism of Pope X: It followed the Baltimore Catechism and placed the baptism of desire in the Baptism Section.
Nicene Creed ( Cushingite) ; It says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' and means there are more than three known baptisms. They are water, blood, desire, seeds of the Word etc.
Nicene Creed ( Feeneyite): It says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins and means there is one known baptism the baptism of water.
New Theology: It refers to the new theology in the Catholic Church based on hypothetical cases being objective in the present times.So it eliminates the dogma EENS.With the dogma EENS made obsolete the ecclesiology of the Church changes. There is a new ecclesiology which is a break with Tradition.
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus ( Cushingite): .It refers to the dogma but with exceptions.All do not need to defacto convert into the Church in the present times, since there are exceptions.
Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus ( Feeneyite): It refers to the dogma as it was interpreted over the centuries.There are no known exceptions to all needing to formally enter the Church, with faith and baptism, to avoid Hell.
Catechism of the Catholic Church ( Cushingite): CCC 1257 contradicts the Principle of Non Contraduction. Also CCC 848 is based on the new theology and so is a rupture with the dogma EENS( Feeneyite).
Catechism of the Catholic Church ( Feeneyite): CCC 1257 does not contradict the Principle of Non Contradiction since there are no known exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation. There are no known exceptions, since God is not limited to the Sacraments.
When CCC 846 states all who are saved are saved through Jesus and the Church,CCC 846 does not contradict the dogmatic teaching on all needin to formally enter the Church. CCC 846 does not contradict Ad Gentes 7 which states all need faith and baptism for salvatioon.

________________________

Apologetica con razionale e tradizionale teologia e dottrina per adesivi , volantini


















Solamente la Chiesa Cattolica
-Lionel Andrades
Cattolico, laico a Roma
Blog: EucharistandMission
E-mail:lionelandrades10@gmail.com


Only the Catholic Church



Solamente la Chiesa Cattolica



Laity could ask the bishop to provide them with FSSP priests who do not make irrational inferences and change the meaning of the Nicene Creed

Laity could ask the bishop to provide them with FSSP priests who do not make irrational inferences and change the meaning of the Nicene Creed

Lionel,


I read your very recent note on the FSSP’s celebrating Mass in Rome today, and altering the words of the Creed to include the “other” baptisms. Utterly scandalous.


I mentioned this to a friend who attends the FSSP church here... and he very much doubts the story. I believe you, but I wonder if there has been a follow-up story, something else on the internet.


Can you help me with more information? Yes, it’s a crazy story, but anything is possible now.


Lionel:


July 3, 2017


Ask your friend to who attends the FSSP church in...USA to clarify the issue.


Tell him to simply ask the FSSP priest if he interprets magisterial documents including Vatican Council II with an irrational premise. The Vatican Curia interprets the Nicene Creed with irrational Cushingism and the FSSP does the same. 1. They can avoid doing this if they want to.


There is a choice. The FSSP can interpret magisterial documents including the Nicene Creed without the irrational premise.2 But they do not do so.


The FSSP position at the Traditional Latin Mass is heretical. It is first class heresy.3


In the Nicene Creed we pray 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sin' and this refers to the baptism of water, the ordinary means of salvation.
The baptism of desire and blood are not known baptisms,they are not defacto, objectively seen. They cannot be administered . The baptism of water instead is visible and repeatable.


So there are not three known baptisms but only one.If the person is saved with the baptism of desire and blood it would include the baptism of water. If a person is saved without the baptism of water, as many allege because of the confusion in the letter of Cardinal Marchetti Selvaggiani (1949), it would not be known to us. There are
no objective cases.There is no known case of someone saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. There is no known case of salvation outside the Church. A possibility in the past cannot be a concrete exception in 2017 to all needing the baptism of water in the Church for salvation.A possibility is only a possibility. It would be known only to God.
So at the Traditional Latin Mass the FSSP priest understands that there are three known baptisms and so he rejects the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus( EENS). EENs is no more like it was in the 16th century .When they offered the Latin Mass there were no exceptions to all needing the baptism of water for salvation.
Ask any FSSP priest, he will not deny that he believes there are exceptions to the dogma EENS and they include the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, all without the baptism of water.He will agree here.
So in other words there were visible and explicit exceptions to EENS. They would have to be visible and known to be exceptions to EENS.
The FSSP priest will agree that this is the inference. It is their inference too.
So when they teach Catechism to children they say not every body needs to enter the Church for salvation.They will not say that all Jews and Muslims in the present times need to convert to avoid the fires of Hell.There are exceptons for all needing the baptism of water for salvation.So they cannot affirm the Nicene Creed as Catholics did over the centuries.
They are liberals like the present magisterium. They offer the Latin Mass with the new ecclesiology and call it the Tridentine Rite Mass.This is a deception. It is also heresy and a mortal sin.
The laity could ask the bishop to provide them with FSSP priests who do not make irrational inferences and change the meaning of the Nicene Creed.
They also interpret Vatican CouncilII with irrational Cushingism when a rational Feeneyite choice is there.
-Lionel Andrades

1.

September 10, 2016

The Vatican Curia interprets the Nicene Creed with irrational Cushingism : 'I believe in three known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins.'

eucharistandmission.blogspot.ro/…/the-vatican-cur…

2.

SEPTEMBER 10, 2016

If the magisterium avoids the error Vatican Council II , Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and Catechism of the Catholic Church can be interpreted with rational and traditional Feeneyism :it's a return to the old ecclesiology
eucharistandmission.blogspot.ro/…/if-magisterium-…

3.

In the hierarchy of values of Pope John Paul II, we are dealing with first class heresy
eucharistandmission.blogspot.ro/…/on-hierarchy-of…





































SEPTEMBER 10, 2016



The Vatican Curia interprets the Nicene Creed with irrational Cushingism : 'I believe in three known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins.'
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/09/the-vatican-curia-interprets-nicene.html


OCTOBER 20, 2012

Archbishop Jose Octavio Ruiz unaware of error in the affirmation of the Nicene Creed : address to Catholic Fraternity of Charismatic Covenant Communities and Fellowships

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/10/archbishop-jose-octavio-ruiz-unaware-of.html