Thursday, August 1, 2013

THERE ARE TWO INTERPRETATIONS OF VATICAN COUNCIL II IN FORCE BUT THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE RATIONAL ONE

 
There is a comment on this blog.It is regarding the post  in which I said there are two interpretations of Vatican Council II.
 
It says:
Well, this is your interpretation, and you are entitled to it.
-J Daniels

August 1, 2013 at 5:10 PM
Delete
Lionel:
No it is not a personal interpretation.

I am pointing out that one can choose to interpret Vatican Council II by using a particular premise or without that premise. In this way there are always two interpretations.
It has nothing to do with me or my views.

It is the same text for all but it can be interpreted with the Richard Cushing Error or without it.

Assume  the dead now saved in Heaven are visible to us on earth and so are an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or assume  that they are not visible to us and so are not exceptions. This is independent of me.

So assume LG 16 refers to being saved in invincible ignorance which is visible or it refers to cases not visible to us and so which are not an exception to the dogmatic teaching which says all need to convert into the Church.So there can be two interpretations but only one rational one.

There are presently two interpretations since most Catholics,including the Vatican Curia are using the irrational one, they can allegedly see the dead.
-Lionel Andrades
 
 
 
Delete
 

There can be two interpretations of Vatican Council II Lumen Fidei has chosen the irrational one.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/07/there-can-be-two-interpretations-of.html#links

Archbishop Gerhard Muller says that the SSPX needs to distinguish the true teaching of the Second Vatican Council: but he will not correct Reuters.

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/12/archbishop-gerhard-muller-says-that.html#links
   

MEDUGORJE BANS BOOK IN WHICH JESUS SAYS CHURCH IS NEGLECTING MISSION AND PROCLAIMING THE GOSPEL TO PROTECT ITS PROPERTY AND INTERESTS

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2011/10/medugorje-bans-book-in-which-jesus-says.html#links
 

IS THE HOLY SPIRIT SAYING LIKE ARCHBISHOP AUGUSTINE DI NOIA THAT LG 8, LG 16 ARE EXPLICITLY KNOWN AND ARE EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOGMA?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2012/07/is-holy-spirit-saying-like-archbishop.html#links

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2013/06/archbishop-marcel-lefebvre-was-in.html#links

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

Fr.Chad Ripperger and FSSP priests not permitted by the Vatican to affirm the traditional teaching on salvation


There is a website, 'dedicated to the defense of the orthodox Catholic faith '  with homilies of Fr.Chad Ripperger , FSSP and no where has he spoken about the salvation dogma with reference to Vatican Council II. How can he? He belongs to the FSSP. In public through silence they hold the same position as those who deny the dogma.They interpret Vatican Council II as a break with the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Chruch.
The FSSP priests who offer the Tridentine Rite Mass in Rome have the same position on other religions as do the New Catehecumenal Way , the Charismatic Renewal and the Jesuits.They study peacefully and with compromised doctrines at the Pontifical Universities in Rome.
I cannot think of any priest who offers the Tridentine Latin Rite Mass in Rome being different. Not a single one.
Fr.Ripperger has to protect his interests. So do the other FSSP priests. So how can he state that Vatican Council II supports the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney.
 
He is not affirming the official teaching of the Catholic Church which says all non Catholics need to convert into the Catholic Church with 'faith and baptism' (AG 7)  and with no known exceptions (LG 16,LG 8 not being known exceptions), This is the official teaching of the Catholic Church according to magisterial documents.
 
The Vatican is not permitting the FSSP priests to affirm the traditional teaching on salvation. It is being denied by Fr.Kramer , the FSSP Rector  in Rome and also Mons. Ignacio Barreiro (ex- FSSP).
 
Catholics do not know their Faith and the FSSP priests like those who offer Mass in the vernacular are not going to teach them it and risk their position and interests.
 
The FSSP priests would not be willing to provide their telephone number  or an e-mail address  for a   pamphlet using traditional Church-texts , after Vatican Council II , on the subject of exclusive salvation being there in only the Catholic Church.
 
The priests who offer the Traditional Latin Rite Mass in Rome are using the same apologetics  as the preists who offer the Novus Ordo Mass. On the issue of salvation and other religions there is no difference.
-Lionel Andrades
_____________________________________________________________
Homilies given by Fr. Ripperger in Tulsa:

Homilies given by Fr. Ripperger in Idaho:

Homilies given by Fr. Ripperger in Memphis:

Misc. conferences given by Fr. Ripperger:

Five conferences given by Fr. Ripperger in Cedar Rapids Iowa:
 
 

If the SSPX (USA) admits there is no known baptism of desire the Regina Coeli House may have to be mortgaged

If the Society of St.Pius X (SSPX) District USA admits that the official position of the Catholic Church is (1) that of Fr.Leonard Feeney  they could have to pay big fines.Or so they fear!.Magisterial documents including Vatican Council II support the literal interpretation of Fr.Leonard Feeney in which the baptism of desire is not an exception to his traditional interpretation of the salvation dogma.

If the SSPX (USA)  admits this, that baptism of desire cases are known only to God and so are irrelevant to the traditional understanding of extra ecclesiam nulla salus,  they would be saying that all Jews and Muslims in 2013 need to convert into the  Church to go to to Heaven and avoid Hell  and there are no  exceptions mentioned in any magisterial text.(Being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire are not exceptions to extra ecclesiam nulla salus  or the traditional teaching on other  religions, other Christians(Protestants) and salvation)
 
So to avoid being considered anti Semitic  etc, they are slandering the priest Fr.Leonard Feeney  and suggesting that the Letter of the Holy office 1949 made a factual mistake in 'condemning ' him.If the Letter of the Holy Office assumed that the baptism of desire was visible to us, then they would have made an objective mistake too.
 
The SSPX  USA may want to keep their expensive property  including the Regina Coeli House, their Headquarters  in Platte City,and to maintain their privileges. So they are repeating the lie (visible exceptions) on a doctrinal issue.They are contradicting the SSPX General Chapter Statement (July 19,2012) which affirmed outside the Church there is no salvation with no exceptions. For the SSPX USA there are exceptions and they are allegedly known to them.This is a compromise. It is convenient.It is denying the Catholic Faith. It is denying Tradition.
 
With no known exceptions all the traditionalists, sedevacantists and orthodox  Catholics can agree on the literal interpretation of the dogma on exclusive salvation being there in only the Catholic Church-without any known exceptions.
 
It means ecclesiology would be ecclesiocentric  for even those priests who offer Holy Mass in the vernacular.
 
If they admitted the truth the SSPX District Superior Fr.Arnaud Rostand at the Regina Ceoli House would be holding the traditional position of the Catholic Church, before and after Vatican Council II.It would be supported by magisterial documents including the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 of Pope Pius XII. The other magisterial documents which support Fr.Leonard Feeney are the CDF, Notification on Fr.Jacques Dupuis S.J (2001), Dominus Iesus 20, Redemptoris Missio 10,55, Vatican Council II (AG 7), Mystici Corporis, Syllabus of Errors, Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441 etc.
-Lionel Andrades
 

Known baptism of desire is the unofficial teaching in the Catholic Church

According to magisterial texts there is no such case as a known-to- us baptism of desire or being saved in invincible ignorance.Similarly those who are saved with 'elements of sanctification and grace'(LG 8) or 'imperfect communion with the church' (UR 3) etc are not known in particular cases in 2013. So they cannot be exceptions to all needing faith and baptism to go to Heaven and avoid Hell (AG 7).
 
This is the un-official teaching of the Catholic Church,with the irratonal visible to us salvation in the present times, which is being promoted by the secular media, Pontifical Universities in Rome and also the Vatican Curia and the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith itself.
 
According to the official teaching of the Church in magisterial texts, before and after Vatican Council II,(1) all non Catholics need to visibly convert into the Catholic Church for salvation.If there is any person saved without formally entering the Catholic Church he would not be known to us  to be an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus. We cannot see these cases-saved in Heaven. 
 
Similarly all Christians need to enter the Catholic Church for salvation, since they do not have Catholic Faith (AG 7), they do not have the moral and faith teachings of the Catholic Church which are necessary to avoid Hell.Neither do they have access to the Sacraments of the Church through which Jesus saves. So there can only be 'an ecumenism of return', according to the official teaching of the Catholic Church.
 
Since the official teaching says outside the church there is no salvation (AG 7, CCC 846 etc) as understood by Fr.Leonard Feeney there is a moral obligation for Catholics to work for a Catholic political state.
Presently the unofficial teaching of the Catholic Church is being used by the SSPX, Neo Cathecumenal Way, Charismatic Renewal Movement, Jesuits, Dominicans, Franciscans etc. Popes Francis and Benedict were using the unofficial teaching of the Catholic Church with no support from Magisterial texts. The magisterial documents (Catechism of the Catholic Church, Dominus Iesus etc)  approved by Pope John Paul are contradicted and so also is the dogma on salvation defined by  past  popes ex cathedra.
-Lionel Andrades
 
1.