Wednesday, December 27, 2017

Lumen Gentium 14 has a philosophical mistake

 






OCTOBER 24, 2017


There is an in principle error in the Vatican Council II text : Does the SSPX have to accept it for canonical status?

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/there-is-in-principle-error-in-vatican.html


OCTOBER 24, 2017


Someone needs to help Cardinal Luiz Ladaria, Archbishop Pozzo and Archbishop Di Noia see how they use a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/10/someone-needs-to-help-cardinal-luiz.html


DECEMBER 12, 2016


Vatican Council II riddled with philosphical error : two popes in principle support objective error in text

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/vatican-council-ii-riddled-with.html


Pope Paul VI made a mistake in Vatican Council II : error repeated in Amoris Laetitia
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/08/pope-paul-vi-made-mistake-in-vatican.html

APRIL 6, 2016

Lumen Gentium was written assuming 'there are known cases of known salvation outside the Roman Catholic Church'! In this way there was a change in ecclesiology : Magisterial heresy
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/lumen-gentium-16-was-written-assuming.html
MARCH 19, 2016

The mistakes in Vatican Council II

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/03/the-mistakes-in-vatican-council-ii.html


JULY 18, 2017

Everyone agrees Vatican Council II has a major philosophical mistake http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2017/07/everyone-agrees-vatican-council-ii-has.html

UNPRECEDENTED ! PHILOSOPHICAL MISTAKES DISCOVERED IN VATICAN COUNCIL II

DECEMBER 13, 2016PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS FOR A PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY : ASK HIM ABOUT MISTAKES IN VATICAN COUNCIL II
DECEMBER 13, 2016Traditionalists too unaware of major philosophical mistake : many errors in Vatican Council II http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/traditionalists-too-unaware-of-major.html
DECEMBER 13, 2016
DECEMBER 12, 2016Vatican Council II riddled with philosphical error : two popes in principle support objective error in texthttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/vatican-council-ii-riddled-with.html
ECEMBER 11, 2016The source of the present Arian-like heresy throughout the Church today is due to the following points http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/the-source-of-present-arian-like-heresy_11.html
DECEMBER 10, 2016The present magisterium has made a major philosophical mistake http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/the-present-magisterium-has-made-major.html
DECEMBER 11, 2016Priest confirms philosophical error : Lefebvre excommunication a mistake http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/priest-confirms-philosophical-error.html
DECEMBER 10, 2016 Scholars supporting four cardinals in major philosophical mistakehttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/scholars-supporting-four-cardinals-in.html 
DECEMBER 1, 2016 There is a mistake in Vatican Council II and once the error is identified and avoided, the interpretation of the Council radically changes.There is no 'spirit of Vatican Council II ' excuse anymore http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/12/there-is-mistake-in-vatican-council-ii.html
NOVEMBER 29, 2016So it is only by using an irrationality that the present magisterium can re-interpret magisterial documents and say Vatican Council II indicates all Jews and Muslims in Italy do not need to convert into the Catholic Church in 2016http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/so-it-only-by-using-irrationality-that.html 
NOVEMBER 28, 2016 Yet it is with this reasoning that cardinals Ratzinger,Kasper and other liberals interpret Vatican Council II. They use an irrational premise to create a non traditional and heretical conclusion.They with their executive power in the Vatican, they call it magisterialhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/yet-it-is-with-this-reasoning-that.html
NOVEMBER 23, 2016The Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate have set a precedent for all religious communities.They have announced that they accept Vatican Council II without Rahnerian theology.This is extra ordinary. Since they are not denying the Council and neither are they denying Tradition http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/the-franciscan-sisters-of-immaculate.html
NOVEMBER 21, 2016Can the SSPX accept Vatican Council II like the Franciscan Sisters of the Immaculate to get canonical status ? : No one tells the pope that he is interpreting Vatican Council II with bad philosophy and bad theology which has now been exposed http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/can-sspx-accept-vatican-council-ii-like.html
NOVEMBER 20, 2016When we get rid of the Rahnerian theology to interpret Vatican Council II then Catholics in general can know the importance of the Social Reign of Christ the King over all political legislation : Feast of Christ the King http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/when-we-get-rid-of-rahnerian-theology.html
NOVEMBER 14, 2016Don Francesco Riscossa has made an objective error. Lumen Gentium 8 refers to a hypothetical case and so it is not relevant or an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus which he has cited in part one of the conference.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/don-francesco-riscossa-has-made.html
NOVEMBER 13, 2016 Don Allessandro Minutella does not deny it : there is no theology in Vatican Council II to contradict the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and an ecumenism of return, Vatican Council II is in accord with the Lefbrists and 'integralists' whom he criticizes in the video http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/frlessandro-minutella-does-not-deny-it.html
NOVEMBER 8, 2016
Today the magisterium wants the SSPX to affirm Vatican Council II with hypothetical cases being objective in the present times and they are not doing so.Neither would I.http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/today-magisterium-wants-sspx-to-affirm.html
NOVEMBER 8, 2016
ONCE WE AVOID THE NEW THEOLOGY, WITH THE IRRATIONAL PREMISE THEN THE CONCLUSION IS TRADITIONAL. WE HAVE THE OLD ECCLESIOLOGY AND UPON IT WE BASE THE TEACHING ON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY, ECUMENISM AND INTER-RELIGIOUS DIALOGUEhttp://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/once-we-avoid-new-theology-with.html
NOVEMBER 8, 2016 Once you have identified the new theology and avoided it,it is possible to view Vatican Council II in the light of Tradition. We would be back to the old ecclesiology at any Mass http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/once-you-have-identified-new-theology.html
NOVEMBER 7, 2016
Pope Benedict XVI was promoting the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition  http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/11/pope-benedict-xvi-was-promoting.html 

Bugie e fango sugli Acta Apostolicae Saedis di don Alfredo Morselli

Bugie e fango sugli Acta Apostolicae Saedis di don Alfredo Morselli

da Messainlatino

Pope Benedict had given up the Church's necessity for salvation with his use of a false premise, Vatican Council has not done so.





During the pontificate of Pope John Paul II there were photos of Indian nuns in Rome published in the anti-Cathoic La Repubblica. Opposition to foreign sisters was part of the policy of the Left. They were opposed to foreign sisters working in the Church in Italy.Their aim is to destroy the Church.
Then Pope Francis announced that foreign sisters should not come here. He was also opposed to bringing foreign religious to Italy to support religious communities.He was probably following instruction.
 So for him when there were few religious in a community  the community should be closed down. Even though there were many vocations in Asia, the community should be closed and the religious not invited to Europe. So he was following the instructions of the Masons. Also when he refers to 'triumphalism' this was the catchword of the Masons and their supporters within the Catholic Church.
Now Pope Francis supports migration on a big scale into Europe.This has been part of the long time agenda of the the Left.  The Left is from Satan. Satan will always be opposed to Jesus and the His Church outside of which there is no salvation.
So Pope Francis supports non Catholics coming as migrants to Italy but not Catholic religious from Asia and Africa since he has to follow the Left who are in power in Italy.He does this to preserve the Vatican and to save his life.May be he also believes in many of the Leftist aims.
Neither of the two popes want to be martyrs.
So when in 2016 Pope Benedict 'broke his silence' and announced that extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century, since there was a development with Vatican Council II, he was probably told to make that important annoncement. He asked in his charachteristic way what was the purpose of mission when there was known salvation outside the Church. He was acting on cue.
In the past too under pressure from the Jewish Left he said that the Revised Good Friday Prayer was not for the conversion of the Jews and so Jews did not have to convert.At other times he said there would be no mission to the Jews.

Why convince people of accepting the Christian faith even if they can be saved without it- Pope Benedict,Avvenire, 2016
Imagine a pope having to state that  a defined dogma of the Church was rejected and that the past magisterium of the pope was no more accepted  and all this was done by assuming invisible cases of the baptism of desire were visible exceptions to the dogma EENS.An irrationality was used to contradict the authentic magisterium of the past.A false premise was used to oppose the teachings of the Holy Spirit in the past.
He is not referring to the Catholic faith but the Christian faith and suggests that people can be saved outside the Church as if he knew of someone  personally.
Then he has also approved joint mission programs with the Protestants. Again, this would be important for the new one world religion with a new image of Jesus and the Catholic Church.He was receiving dictation and was implementing it as a pope.
He had given up the Church's necessity for salvation with the use of his false premise, Vatican Council has not done so.-Lionel Andrades.



Image result for Photo of Cushingite heresy

Father Nicholas Gruner and John Vennari were also unknowingly following the new theology


Father Nicholas Gruner and John Vennari were  also following the new theology of ecclesiastical Masonry and they were doing this unknowingly.
They assumed unknown people saved with the baptism of desire were known people saved outside the Church and so in principle, in precept at least, for them these were exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
So since for them hypothetical cases were non hypothetical, in their interpretation of EENS, they applied this wrong reasoning to Vatican Council II.LG 16 became a rupture with EENS and they wrongly blamed Vatican Council II.
Of course their conclusion was non traditional and heretical and so they rejected Vatican Council II. They did not know that the fault lay with their inference.
Then they also knew that there was something missing in Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus and other magisterial documents of Pope John Paul II.Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith(CDF).They could not however put their finger on exactly what was the cause of the problem.These documents obviously did not have the clear teaching of the past on outside the Church there is no salvation.
They were not aware, they did not know,  that Cardinal Ratzinger was using the same new theology, Cushingite theology as them. It was based on the false premise used by the traditionalists in general.
I  sent them e-mails many times.They could not understand what I was saying.Or they probably did not want to make the transition and announce that they had it wrong all these years.
They could probably brush it off, like the SSPX priests, as being "Feeneyism".For the SSPX priests the St. Benedict Centers were wrong  in not accepting BOD, BOB and I.I as exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
Fr.Gruner and John Vennari could not make the invisible-visible distinction, they could not differentiate between known and unknown cases of the baptism of desire.So when they would read magisterial documents they mixed up references to what is invisible as being visible.
Fr. Gruner would affirm the Feeneyite interpretation of EENS when referring to the Church Councils but he would also consider the baptism of desire  as being relevant to EENS.In other words, there were known and visible cases, for them to be exceptions.The baptism of desire was not known only to God.
So Mystici Corporis  and the Catechism of Pope Pius X had to be an exception to Feeneyite EENS  for them- and they were confused.
Their helplessness was seen openly in their criticism of the CDF documents issued by Cardinal Ratzinger. Christopher Ferrara  also did not know the exact cause of the problem. They were aware,though,  of the problem.-Lionel Andrades

Brunero Gherardino had it wrong and Roberto dei Mattei based his writings upon the Monsignor's irrational theology


Msgr.Brunero Gherardino had it wrong and Roberto dei Mattei has said that he has based his writings on the theology of Gherardino.They both interpreted Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition since hypothetical cases were assumed to be known people saved outside the Church;Lumen Gentium 16 referred to someone known saved in invincible ignorance and without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7) in the Catholic Church.














They both also interpreted invisible for us baptism of desire as being a visible exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).This was irrational and upon this irrationality was based the theology of Rahner and Ratzinger and the Masons, which they both accepted.
-Lionel Andrades