Author Topic: Fr. Cardozo calls heresy to deny BOD (Read 4031 times)

JPaul · « **Reply #30 on:** November 19, 2015, 06:26:27 PM »

Quote from: Merry

Centroamerica - Is that YOUR statement: "Feeneyites are fatherless bastards..." etc. ???

May God forgive the author of it.

Yes, that really is a foolish statement, full of ignorance and ill will.

JPaul · « **Reply #31 on:** November 19, 2015, 06:29:17 PM »

Father Cardozo appears to be a typical SSPX priest, who like the Archbishop believes in salvation outside of the Church and without the sacraments. Vatican II in the flesh.

MarylandTrad · « **Reply #32 on:** November 23, 2015, 10:16:02 PM »

Quote from: catholicunity

Ex-SSPX Priest, Fr. Cardozo, who travels to Mexico, USA and other latin america countries

He answered me directly saying "The Church issued a condemnation for those who deny Baptism of Desire"

He was referring to the letter which was sent to Boston in 1949 "Protocol 122/49." (The letter was only published in 1953 by the Archdiocese of Boston' newsletter)

P.S: The " Protocol 122/49 " does not condemn anything related to Baptism because the letter is about "No Salvation Outside the Church" dogma

These SSPX trained priests do not believe dogma as defined. They instead teach that dogmas need to be understood in the sense which the Church understands them. The only reason for them to say that "dogmas need to be understood in the sense which the Church understands them" is if they believe that the literal meaning of dogmatic formulas are merely symbols of the truth, but do not absolutely contain the truth.

Archbishop Lefebvre articulated the orthodox teaching on the immutability of dogmatic formulas in his book Against the Heresies, where he first quoted Pope St. Agathon: "Nothing that has been regularly defined can bear dimunition, or change, or addition, and repels every alteration of sense, or even of words," and then commented, "Not only must one not change the meaning of what has been defined, but not even the expression can be modified...One must not change the expression once it has been defined. It is the terms themselves that have been defined. If they ever are changed, the doctrine is ruined."

ABL's teaching quoted above is in direct opposition to the modernist claim that dogmas need to be understood in the sense which the Church understands them. Dogmas need to be understood in the sense which the Church has defined!

ABL failed to apply his own teaching on dogmatic formulas to the definitions of the popes on the necessity of Church membership for salvation and the canons of Trent on the necessity of baptism for salvation. It appears the majority of that the SSPX trained priests have failed as well.

songbird · « **Reply #33 on:** November 24, 2015, 01:43:56 PM »

I back you up Stubborn!!! Thumbs up!!!

OldMerry · « **Reply #34 on:** November 24, 2015, 05:41:27 PM »

https://hieronymopolis.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/architects-of-confusion-scanned-by-hieronymopolis.pdf

And again ... alas and alack ... starting on page 6 in the above link, is the explanation "from the horse's mouth" of the why, what and how of the the "excommunication" and the Protocol letter, etc. etc. This docuмent was written specifically to give voice to what really happened, and the Center's side of the story. It was most carefully written and published for exactly discussions like this one.

tinyhall · « **Reply #35 on:** December 02, 2015, 12:23:08 PM »

With all evidence we have we can say that Fr. Cardozo should be revisiting his false positions and retracting in public

He is following a teaching of St. Augustine in the book "City of God" which St Angustine himself retracted in the book "Retractions" later in his life

Fr Cardozo thus is following a proposition of a Saint and not the Catholic Church.

Priests tend to believe in their own interpretations of the Bible, i.e saying that Baptism of Desire is proven by the "Good Thief" in the scripture rather than the teaching of the Church
The Church never taught and never intended to taught Baptism of Desire and it does not teach related to the Good Thief as a proof of "Salvation by desire of it"

Conclusion: He is a valid priest BUT is teaching error and heresy AND he is teaching his own private interpretations of the Bible

A Catholic person who follows the Popes and the Infallible teaching of the Church should consider asking Fr. Cardozo if he revisited his positions regarding this issue before donating/helping/follow him.

Remember: We follow the religion of God and not the propositions of men.

1) The Church condemned as a heresy to deny Baptism of Desire during Pio XII Pontificate ; False

2) The Good Thief is an example of Baptism of Desire; False

3) St Augustine "City of God" is a proof that man are saved by other means than Baptism of Water; False

4) St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas are to be held as the teaching of the Church; False

5) To reject St Thomas Aquinas theological speculations is an grave error; False

This is very dangerous: Using one's own interpretation of the Bible and to use quotes from Saints to support your belief. A honest person can look at the book Retractiones and see that St. Augustine himself retracted many teachings including the Good Thief example

We, Catholics, also follow the teaching of the Church and not the teaching of men, theologians or philosophers.