Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: His Eminence Cardinal John De Lugo De Virtue Fidei Divinae, 1646  (Read 2385 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: His Eminence Cardinal John De Lugo De Virtue Fidei Divinae, 1646
« Reply #5 on: February 08, 2020, 11:46:53 AM »
DeLugo, SeanJohnson, and XavierSem are all heretics.  SeanJohnson and XavierSem are also both schismatics, since if they believe this, they have no justification for being Traditional Catholics and rejecting Vatican II.  As I said before, it was a bunch of Jesuits (DeLugo among them) who began to promote this heresy in the early 1600s, a theory which, as St. Alphonsus notes, is contrary to all the Scriptures and also the unanimous consensus of the Church Fathers and had been for the first 1600 years of the Church completely unheard of.

By the way, XavierSem is also an abject liar, for earlier he asserted that he believed in the necessity of explicit faith in Jesus Christ and the Holy Trinity for salvation.

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: His Eminence Cardinal John De Lugo De Virtue Fidei Divinae, 1646
« Reply #6 on: February 08, 2020, 11:58:23 AM »
de Lugo (and SeanJohnson and XavierSem)

... Turks and ... Moslems, as well as the Jews, ... [and] most heretics ... can be saved.

Council of Florence:
Quote
[The Church] firmly believes, professes, and proclaims that ... pagans, ... Jews and heretics and schismatics cannot become participants in eternal life, but will depart “into everlasting fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels” [Matt. 25:41], unless before the end of life the same have been added to the flock;

Your heresy cannot be more clear.  You have the diabolical audacity to assert that Catholic teaching (even dogma) is verbatim the exact opposite of what the Church dogmatically taught at Florence.


Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: His Eminence Cardinal John De Lugo De Virtue Fidei Divinae, 1646
« Reply #7 on: February 08, 2020, 12:00:31 PM »
Holy Office in 1703 condemned the notion of salvation by implicit faith, and so did Vatican I in principle (as detailed elsewhere).

Offline Ladislaus

  • Supporter
Re: His Eminence Cardinal John De Lugo De Virtue Fidei Divinae, 1646
« Reply #8 on: February 08, 2020, 12:02:26 PM »
Thank you for the quote from de Lugo!!

It EXACTLY expresses my belief on invincible ignorance (and therefore implicit baptism of desire), and so far as I can tell, the Church’s teaching on same.

So this day the self-appointed Resistance mouthpiece and the neo-SSPX shill have become friends, united in the bond of heresy.

Re: His Eminence Cardinal John De Lugo De Virtue Fidei Divinae, 1646
« Reply #9 on: February 08, 2020, 12:03:51 PM »
If Liarslaus called Cardinal Lugo, whom St. Alphonsus highly esteemed, as a heretic to his face, the Church would likely have him burnt at the stake as a heretic himself. 

The idiot also totally misrepresents St. Alphonsus and had no idea at all about him until I corrected him with numerous sources. All these sources clearly teach Justification by Implicit Faith, and Salvation by Explicit Faith, is more probable; and that is my opinion too.

The blaspheming heretic who is now an outright Ibranyist heretic, after his master Ibranyi who called St. Alphonsus a heretic, has shown himself to be like an Old Catholic sectarian heretic entirely cut off from the Church. He has no clue how Theology proceeds in the Church. The Implicit-Explicit Faith controversy, as taught by so many Theologians, is like the Thomist-Molinist controversy. I'm a Thomist, but for the very reason I'm a Thomist, I will never call a Molinist or one who holds the minority opinion a heretic, unless the Church dogmatically defines, and then all theologians will become unanimous in teaching the question is closed.

Ladislaus is a demented demon who wants others to be damned, a faithless Ibranyist heretic who insults Great Doctors and Theologians, and cannot be treated as a Catholic in the external forum any longer, until he recants this, and formally retracts it, before the Authorities of the Church, whose Authority he denies, proving he is a formal heretic.