Saturday, October 28, 2017

Faculty at Sacred Heart Major Seminary agree there are no known cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance in 2017




Dr.Robert Fastiggi says Pope Pius XII wrote an encyclical (47:10) which does not say  that those outside the Church belong to the Mystical Body but he does say that there are some who by an unconscious desire and longing have a certain relationship with the Mystical Body of the Redeemer this was cited in a Letter of the Holy Office 1949 are saved.

Lionel: Exactly. Pope Pius XII in Mystici Corporis does not state that those outside the Church belong to the Mystical Body.
He also did not say that we know of any person in particular saved with an unconscious desire, within or outside the church.
The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 made a mistake.
The same mistake was repeated in Vatican Council II(LG 16 etc).Being saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire do not refer to any one saved outside the Church.
______________________________________


Dr.Robert Fastiggi then says that there was a big breakthrough as God also excepts an implicit desire so it was accepted that there could be explicit baptism of desire and implicit baptism of desire.(51:40)

Lionel: How can there be explicit baptism of desire? How can we know of someone who has an implicit baptism of desire and who will be saved ? 
When there are no known case of explicit or implicit baptism of desire how could the baptism of desire be relevant to the dogma EENS ?
_________________________________________


After saying that  Fr. Leonard Feeney was wrong for not accepting the baptism of desire as the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 stated, Dr.Fastiggi says that Fr. Leonard Feeney was not excommunicated for heresy(1:13:20)!!
He criticizes Archbishop Lefebvre for being disobedient too like Fr. Leonard Feeney.He wanted both of them to accept that hypothetical and invisible cases, in our reality, were visible and known examples, of salvation outside the Church.Since they did not affirm this nonsense they were excommunicated.
Dr.Robert Fastiggi's  talk was based on the false premise.He assumes the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance refer to known people saved outside the Church.There can be no such known- case.Then he assumes that Lumen Gentium 16(invincible ignorance) etc also refer to known people saved outside the Church.So for him Vatican Council II becomes a rupture with the dogma EENS as it was defined by the Council of Florence 1441 which he quoted and rejected.
For me,unlike him, hypothetical cases are not exceptions to the dogma EENS.So for me, Vatican Council II is not a rupture with the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS.
Our premises are different and so our conclusions have to be different.
Even the  faculty at Sacred Heart agree with the philosophical principle that invisible people cannot be visible at the same time.I repeat, they agree with me that invisible people cannot be physically visible exceptions to the dogma EENS. So we are all in agreement here.There has been no denial from any one in Detroit on this point.
They may not want to accept the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS but no one is saying that there is a known case of someone saved outside the Church in the present times.We are all united on this point in Detroit.
So when Robert Fastiggi, Ralph Martin and Phillip Blosser agree that the baptism of desire and blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, with or without the baptism of water, are not visible and personally known in our reality, there are no exceptions to the dogma EENS in 2017.All the students in Detroit would agree here.Even non Catholics would say that this reasoning is rational.
 They are not exceptions to EENS as it was known to the missionaries in the 16th century and the past magisterium of the Church.There is no denial from them on this point, I repeat.
So when Archbishop Lefebvre did not accept Vatican Council II he was correct.He was being asked to accept Vatican Council II in which hypothetical cases, were considered explicit exceptions, to the dogma.Now the faculty at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary accept  that invisible cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance cannot be visible exceptions to all needing to be incorporated into the Church as members for salvation.So Archbishop Lefebvre was correct,Vatican Council II with the premise was false, and once again, like in the Fr. Leonard Feeney case, the magisterium made a mistake.
The faculty like the Archdiocese Office for religious education, evangelisation etc, are not permitted to teach this. At Detroit they have to teach seminarians and lay students that invisible cases are visible at the same time and they are objective exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS. So it is obligatory to interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with EENS and the Syllabus of Errors.If they do not teach this irrationality the professors will no more have the mandatum from the Archdiocese to teach theology and philsophy at Detroit.This is controlled ideology and they call it the deposit of the faith.
-Lionel Andrades

1.
AUGUST 9, 2017

For Ralph Martin,Robert Fastiggi and Phillip Blosser BOD etc refer to invisible cases but students at Detroit have to infer that they are visible
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/08/for-ralph-martinrobert-fastiggi-and.html

 JULY 13, 2017

Prof. Robert Fastiggi, Ralph Martin agree that invisible people cannot be visible at the same time : in agreement with Fr. Stefano Visintin's statement  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/prof-robert-fastiggi-ralph-martin-agree.html


There is an in principle error in the text of Vatican Council II and Dr.Robert Fastiggi is not aware of it

There is an in principle error in Vatican Council II and this cannot be the work of the Holy Spirit and if Catholics reject the Council only because of this I would not be surprised. However I think we can still affirm the Council since the error can be omitted in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.We then have what I call Vatican Council II (premise-free).
The premise is: invisible people are visible in the present times.
The premise is, hypothetical cases are not always hypothetical as in the case of the baptism of desire.
The premise is that invisible cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance refer to known people saved outside the Church in the present times. 1
Vatican Council II (premise-free) was magisterial before the confusion at the time of Pope Pius XII.
Magisterium refers to the teaching authority of the Church inspired by the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit cannot make a mistake.The Holy Spirit cannot teach that hypothetical cases of the baptism of desire etc are non hypothetical now.The Holy Spirit cannot teach that we must conclude that these invisible cases are objective exceptions to centuries old interpretation of the Church on exclusive salvation.This was would be irrational reasoning. It would be a rupture between faith and reason.The Holy Spirit would also be contradicting its teachings over the centuries. It would mean the missionaries and the magisterium made a mistake in the 16th century.
The in principle error comes from the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 when it was assumed that hypothetical cases are known exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).So in principle hypothetical cases are mentioned in many Council documents(Lumen Gentium,Ad Gentes etc).The reader is allowed to assume that these hypothetical cases are exceptions to the dogma EENS and the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.
This is how it is wrongly interpreted by professors of theology like Dr.Robert Fastiggi at the Sacred Heart Major Seminary Detroit ( see video).
The error is there in Vatican Council II itself. Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation and it also mentions those who are saved in invincible ignorance as if these are known exceptions to all needing faith and baptism.There should have been no mention of invincible ignorance, the baptism of desire and blood in Vatican Council II. Since these are references to invisible and unknown cases in our reality past and present. So they were never ever exceptions to the dogma EENS.This was a mistake made in the Fr. Leonard Feeney case.
So when Lumen Gentium mentioned those who have not received the Gospel, a reader who is not aware of the error, will assume this is a reference to someone saved outside the Church.This is how Dr. Fastiggi reads the Council. Similarly in Nostra Aetate, it could be assumed that a Jew, Muslim or Hindu is saved outside the Church.This confusion would be natural since the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 suggests that there is known salvation outside the Church.This was accepted by cardinals at Vatican Council II and was not corrected by the popes.
In the Fr. Leonard Feeney case Rome and Boston considered the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance as referring to known people saved outside the Church. This was irrational. Since there is no such known person. This was non traditional. It contradicts the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church. It was heretical.Since it rejects the dogma EENS as it was known over the centuries.It changes the meaning of the Nicene Creed when we pray ' I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins'.
(18:26) What about those who are not members of the Church are they lost? ,Fastiggi asks, with a  helpless look.He has to be confused.Since for him there is known salvation outside the Church.
For him Fr.Leonard Feeney was wrong and the Holy Office 1949 correct while for me the Holy Office was wrong and Fr. Leonard Feeney was correct.
So for him LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 etc refer to known exceptions to the dogma EENS, as it did for the cardinals of the Holy Office in 1949. For me LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 refer to unknown people in the present times, invisible cases, people who would only be known to God if they existed, so Fr. Leonard Feeney was correct and the Holy Office wrong.There can be no known exceptions to the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS.
So for Prof.Robert Fastiggi the Holy Spirit has changed His teachings on exclusive salvation in the Church. For me there is no change.There is no change in the ecclesiology of the Church, since there can be no evidence for us humans of salvation outside the Church.The ecclesiology of the Catholic Church before and after Vatican Council II is the same for me - it is exclusivist.
So because of this in principle error in Vatican Council II which was not corrected by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Dr.Fastiggi interprets Vatican Council II as a rupture with the past theology on salvation. Those who do not accept this rupture he calls schismatics and heretics.This comes out in his debate on Ecclesiology with Bishop Donald Sanborn.
While for me he is a heretic for rejecting EENS( premise-free), Nicene Creed( premise-free) and Vatican Council II ( premise-free).He is in schism with the past magisterium of the Church as are the present two popes.He is politically correct with the Left at Detroit and so keeps his teaching job.
It is obligatory for the Rector of the Sacred Heart Major Seminary to interpret Vatican Council II and EENS with the false premise.This has been approved by the USCCB and the liberal rabbis in the USA.
The irony today is that conservative and traditionalist Catholics also interpret Vatican Council II in principle with  invisible people being  visible in the present times,  hypothetical cases are not always hypothetical as in the case of the baptism of desire and that  invisible cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance refer to known people saved outside the Church in the present times.These are all false premises which were normal for the cardinals at Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades

1.

Traditionalists oppose Pope Francis on morals but give him a pass on salvation

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/traditionalists-oppose-pope-francis-on.html

First Reading at Saturday Mass today : You Are No Longer Strangers And Sojourners,But You Are Fellow Citizens With The Holy Ones And Members Of The Household Of God, Built Upon The Foundation Of The Apostles And Prophets,With Christ Jesus Himself As The Capstone.

Feast of Saints Simon and Jude, Apostles
Lectionary: 666

Reading 

1EPH 2:19-22

Brothers and sisters:

You are no longer strangers and sojourners,but you are fellow citizens with the holy ones and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the Apostles and prophets,with Christ Jesus himself as the capstone.

Through him the whole structure is held together and grows into a temple sacred in the Lord;in him you also are being built together into a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

Responsorial Psalm
R. (5a) Their message goes out through all the earth.
The heavens declare the glory of God,
and the firmament proclaims his handiwork.
Day pours out the word to day,
and night to night imparts knowledge.
R. Their message goes out through all the earth.
Not a word nor a discourse
whose voice is not heard;
Through all the earth their voice resounds,
and to the ends of the world, their message.
R. Their message goes out through all the earth.

Alleluia 
R. Alleluia, alleluia.
We praise you, O God,
we acclaim you as Lord;
the glorious company of Apostles praise you.
R. Alleluia, alleluia.

Gospel
LK 6:12-16
Jesus went up to the mountain to pray,
and he spent the night in prayer to God.
When day came, he called his disciples to himself,
and from them he chose Twelve, whom he also named Apostles:
Simon, whom he named Peter, and his brother Andrew,
James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew,
Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus,
Simon who was called a Zealot,
and Judas the son of James,
and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.















OCTOBER 27, 2017


Gospel Reading at Mass today : You know how to interpret the appearance of the earth and the sky; why do you not know how to interpret the present time?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/gospel-reading-at-mass-today-you-know.html

OCTOBER 26, 2017

First Reading at Mass today : But what profit did you get then from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/first-reading-at-mass-today-but-what.html


OCTOBER 25, 2017


Gospel Reading for Mass today : Be sure of this if the master of the house had known the hour when the thief was coming, he would not have let his house be broken into. You also must be prepared, for at an hour you do not expect, the Son of Man will come

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/gospel-reading-for-mass-today-if-master.html


OCTOBER 24, 2017


Gospel Reading at Mass today : Gird your loins and light your lamps and be like servants who await their master's return from a wedding,ready to open immediately when he comes and knocks

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/gospel-reading-at-mass-today-gird-your.html

OCTOBER 23, 2017


Gospel Reading at Mass today Parable of the Rich Fool : 'You fool, this night your life will be demanded of you;and the things you have prepared, to whom will they belong?'

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/gospel-reading-at-mass-today-parable-of.html


Cardinal Brandmüller: Defenders of Second Liaison Are "Excommunicated"

Cardinal Brandmüller: Defenders of Second Liaison Are "Excommunicated"

"Whoever claims that a new liaison may begin while a lawfully married partner is still alive, is excommunicated, because this is a heresy”, Cardinal Walter Brandmüller, 88, told German Daily Frankfu…
https://www.gloria.tv/language/S2mQ8XjTcSwL3q8noxk8XEbJo

Communion for divorced-and-remarried is a rejection of Divine law: Cardinal Arinze

Communion for divorced-and-remarried is a rejection of Divine law: Cardinal Arinze

15:09
Kardinal Arinze im Interview über Wiederverheiratete Geschiedene.
https://www.gloria.tv/language/S2mQ8XjTcSwL3q8noxk8XEbJo

Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary Still River, MA,USA could lose canonical status because of Feeneyism

brsgrp2017
The religious community of Fr.Leonard Feeney in Worcester,USA has canonical status and they affirm Vatican Council II with the premise like the two popes.When the SSPX does the same they also will be regularised.
The community of Fr.Leonard Feeney in Manchester,USA,still do not have canonical status but they could be granted it in future.They also affirm Vatican Council II with some reservations.It is the same with Cardinal Raymond Burke, Michael Voris and other conservatives who criticize Vatican Council II but accept it with an irrational premise which makes it a rupture with Tradition. They are approved by the present magisterium.
Then there are tradtionalists like Louie Verrecchio who reject Vatican Council II but still interpret it with an irrational premise.He does not choose Vatican Council II(premise- free) since he still does not fully understand the concept.

srsgrp2016
None of all of them mentioned here, can state that the two popes are in heresy for rejecting the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.Since all of them have rejected the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church with  their interpretation of Vatican Council II( with the premise) and extra ecclesiam nulla salus ( with the premise).

When the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary(MICM) in the diocese of Worcester affirm Vatican Council II with the premise, they  negate the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus as it was interpreted by Fr. Leonard Feeney.Since, LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 etc are seen by them as visible and known cases, saved outside the Church. So they become exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).Then they reject Vatican Council II.However they are also implying that invincible ignorance(LG 16) etc refer to known people saved outside the Church and so this is why they reject Vatican Council II.If they are known people saved outside the Church they are exceptions to EENS too.So they are rejecting Feeneyism.This is why they are approved by the bishop of the diocese and the Vatican.
Not for me.Being saved in invincible ignorance is not an exception to the dogma for me.
They do not seem to know about Vatican Council II( premise -free).The MICM at the St.Benedict Center, Worcester do not state that LG 16, LG 8, UR 3 etc refer to invisible people in 2017 and so these references are not exceptions to the dogma EENS.There is no announcement from them saying  Vatican Council II is Feeneyite and in harmony with the missionaries of the 16th century, so they do not have a problem with the Council.This is good news for them.Their present irrational and non traditional interpretation of the Council is welcomed by the Jewish Left, the two popes and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.It is politically correct.It is not orthodox Catholic doctrine and theology.
The MICM communites know that Feeneyism is in harmony with the magisterium of the 16th century which did not know about the false premise.They know that to be a Catholic is to be a Feeneyite. To be a traditionalist is to be a Feeneyite.Feeneyism is part of the Catholic identity.
If the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, the St.Benedict Center at Still River,Mass.,USA ,would announce that they affirm Vatican Council II without the irrational premise there would be a stir.If they announce that they interpret hypothetical cases as just being hypothetical ; LG 16 is not an exception to EENS there would be confusion at the Vatican, the Archdiocese of Boston and the rest of New England,USA.This would be seen as a  rebellion. This is not the acceptable understanding between Catholic religious communities canonically recognised,  and the popes and cardinals, who have all chosen the irrational premise.
If the MICM state that they affirm all magisterial documents, including Vatican Council II, however interpret them all without the innovative premise,which is the basis for the new theology, and so are back to the old ecclesiology of the Church upon which depended the old theology of an ecumenism of return and the need for all non Christians to be incorporated into the Church as members for salvation, there canonical status may be withdrawn. Once again they would disparagingly be called 'Feeneyites'.
They would be considered a bad example for other religious communities like the Franciscans, Dominicans, Carmelities, Redemptorists etc.They have always been granted canonical status since they interpret all magisterial documents with the false premise to create a non traditional conclusion.
-Lionel Andrades

https://www.saintbenedict.com/theorder/brothers
 
https://www.saintbenedict.com/index.php/theorder/stbenedict-center-history





Did you know that the Brothers, Slaves of The Immaculate Heart of Maryhave been doing some recording for a local affiliate of EWTN? Check this new endeavor as well as their short inspiring audio recordings here on our site!


Recently the Brothers began working with WQPH, a local radio affiliate of EWTN, which serves the northern Worcester County in Massachusetts. Mary Ann...
SAINTBENEDICT.COM

https://www.facebook.com/SaintBenedictCenter/



OCTOBER 27, 2017


Traditionalists oppose Pope Francis on morals but give him a pass on salvation

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/traditionalists-oppose-pope-francis-on.html