With the Lionel Andrades approach in the interpretation of Magisterial documents the liberals and the Left can no more accuse the traditionalists as being in schism

With the Lionel Andrades approach in the interpretation of Magisterial documents the liberals  and the Left can no more accuse the traditionalists as being in schism since they reject Vatican Council II, while at the same time the traditionalists affirm some form of outside the Church there is no salvation. Usually it is interpreted with Cushingism and is not the original interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) with Feeneyite theology.

I affirm Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and also EENS ( Feeneyite).This is my approach. I do not use the false premise.So Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are in harmony, for me, with the past ecclesiology of the Church.

But I attend Mass in Italian and do not go exclusively for Mass in the Traditional Latin Rite.Yet I am affirming the ecclesiology of the missionaries in the 16th century on EENS, when they offered or attended the Tridentine Rite Mass. My theology is the same as theirs.

So the ecclesiology before and after Vatican Council II has not changed for me and yet I support Medugorje and do not have a problem with the Neo Catechumenal Way, the Focolares and the Catholic Charismatic Renewal. I do not agree with everything they do.

I like the Traditional Latin Mass and attend it when possible. I understand more at this Mass in Latin then the one at San Anastasio in Rome, where they have the Greek Rite.

So my point is that I do not have to attend only the Latin Mass to affirm the past ecclesiology, the old ecumenism and traditional EENS. I can support Vatican Council II ( Feeneyite) and the Catechisms( Feeneyite) along with the Syllabus of Errors. There is no rupture.I do not have to choose between them.

I can affirm the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, all with Feeneyism, and also, Feeneyite EENS. I do not have to choose.

This is all only rationally possible with the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents.-Lionel Andrades

 SEPTEMBER 10, 2018

Why do I call it the Lionel Andrades model? Since I am the only one working on this.No one else on earth has discussed what precisely creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Vatican Council II.They all agree that Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of rupture but they did not know the precise cause

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/09/why-do-i-call-it-lionel-andrades-model.html

Why do I call it the Lionel Andrades model? Since I am the only one working on this.No one else on earth has discussed what precisely creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Vatican Council II.They all agree that Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of rupture but they did not know the precise cause.

Why do I call it the Lionel Andrades model? Since I am the only one working on this.

No one else on earth has discussed what precisely creates  the hermeneutic of rupture with Vatican Council II.They all agree that Vatican Council II has a hermeneutic of rupture but they did not know the precise cause.

The precise cause is interpreting the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance as referring to known and objectively seen people, non Catholics, saved outside the Catholic Church.This was the mistake in the Fr. Leonard Feeney case.

Then the same irrational theology was repeated at Vatican Council II.
Lumen Gentium 8, Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16, Unitatis Redintigratio 2, Nostra Aetate 2, Gaudium et Specs 22 etc do not refer to non Catholics whom we can meet in 2018, who are saved outside the Church, without 'faith and baptism'.
I avoid these errors and so there is no rupture with Tradition and we do not have to reject Vatican Council II.
-Lionel Andrades

SEPTEMBER 10, 2018

Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church have a hermeneutic of continuity with the past exclusivist ecclesiology and Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) only when interpreted with what I call the Lionel Andrades model

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/09/vatican-council-ii-and-catechism-of.html

SEPTEMBER 10, 2018

So now we can interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the 'strict interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and without the hermeneutic of rupture. This is the Lionel Andrades model

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/09/so-now-we-can-interpret-vatican-council.html

 SEPTEMBER 8, 2018

Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct and Pope Pius XII and the Archbishop of Boston, Cardinal Cushing were wrong.Literally there are no baptism of desire cases.Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj was wrong at the Placuet Deo Press Conference. Literally there are no known cases of non Catholics saves outside the Church

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/09/frleonard-feeney-was-correct-and-pope.html

SEPTEMBER 7, 2018

Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston was orthodox and the popes and the present Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are in heresy. Quite a thing to say ! I know     http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/09/fr-leonard-feeney-of-boston-is-orthodox.html

• Lionel Andrades' Catholic beliefs (7)
• Lionel Andrades' description of Feeneyism and Cushingism (4)
• Lionel Andrades' intepretation of Vatican Council II and Extra ecclesiam nulla salus (4)
• Lionel Andrades' interpretation of Vatican Council II and EENS (6)

Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church have a hermeneutic of continuity with the past exclusivist ecclesiology and Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) only when interpreted with what I call the Lionel Andrades model.

Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church have a hermeneutic of continuity with the past exclusivist ecclesiology and Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) only when interpreted with what I call the Lionel Andrades model.Otherwise I have called it the Feeneyite approach, as opposed to the Cushingite version or the interpretation of magisterial documents with the false premise( invisible people are visible).

Without the Feeneyite approach Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church would be a break with the Catechism of Pope Pius X on ecumenism and no salvation outside the Church.The Catechism of the Catholic Church would be a rupture with EENS according to the 14th, 15th and 16th century-Magisterium.It would also not have a continuity with the Syllabus of Errors which affirms the past ecclesiology of the Church.

Since if invincible ignorance etc in the Catechism of Pope Pius X is interpreted with common Cushingism, the hermeneutic of rupture is created.A false premise produces a non traditional conclusion, a false result.

-Lionel Andrades

 SEPTEMBER 10, 2018

So now we can interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the 'strict interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and without the hermeneutic of rupture. This is the Lionel Andrades model

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/09/so-now-we-can-interpret-vatican-council.html

 SEPTEMBER 8, 2018

Fr.Leonard Feeney was correct and Pope Pius XII and the Archbishop of Boston, Cardinal Cushing were wrong.Literally there are no baptism of desire cases.Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj was wrong at the Placuet Deo Press Conference. Literally there are no known cases of non Catholics saves outside the Church

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/09/frleonard-feeney-was-correct-and-pope.html

SEPTEMBER 7, 2018

Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston was orthodox and the popes and the present Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are in heresy. Quite a thing to say ! I know

http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2018/09/fr-leonard-feeney-of-boston-is-orthodox.html

So now we can interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the 'strict interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and without the hermeneutic of rupture. This is the Lionel Andrades model.

So now we can interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the 'strict interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and without the hermeneutic of rupture. This is the Lionel Andrades model.1

So now there is the Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II in which Lumen Gentium 8 is not an exception to EENS and there is the Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj common version.For Cardinal Ladaria, Prefect of the Congregation for Doctrine and Faith(CDF), at the Placuet Deo Press Conference, LG 8 was an exception to EENS.

So there is the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II and that of Pope Benedict ( March 1,2016, Avvenire).

There is the Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II in harmony  with EENS according to the missionaries in the 16th century and there is that of the Society of St. Pius X(SSPX), the FSSP and the Instute of Christ the King and the rest of the traditionalists and sedevacantists.For all of them Vatican Council II (LG 8 etc) is a rupture with Tradition( EENS, Syllabus etc).

There is the Lionel Andrades interpretation of Vatican Council II for which he was banned twice by the University Pontificial Regina Apostolorum(UPRA), Rome, twice, even after his matriculation was granted to study there.
The priests and lay professors at UPRA continue to interpret Vatican Council II as a rupture with EENS, since this is the political Left requirement for the Vatican.

One of the priest-professors of philosophy at UPRA affirmed the strict interpretation of the dogma EENS and told me in his office that this was the teaching of the Catholic Church( Cantate Domino, Council of Florence 1441) and this was his belief irrespective of what positions the other professors at UPRA held.
So after I posted what he said on this blog I e-mailed Fr. Michael Ryan, former Dean of Philosophy and Fr( ex) Thomas Williams former Dean of Theology at UPRA and asked them if I could quote them supporting their colleague on EENS.They did not respond.
Later the priest-professor who originally affirmed EENS changed his position and tried to discourage me.

The second time a few years later, when I was not allowed  to complete my final semester in Philosophy ( after the university office mistakenly granted me my matriculation number and completed all the formalities), the Italian Registrar was very sorry about the decision of the professors. He said that at UPRA they do not reject any student.This was the first time it has ever happened.He was not happy with the decision.I was not even allowed to enter the university premises.

This was discrimination based on religion while Fr.Michael Ryan l.c and Fr.(ex) Thomas Williams would not affirm a Catholic dogma in harmony with Vatican Council II and they still considered themselves Catholics teaching Catholic theology and doctrine.
It was the same story at the Legion of Christ's seminary, Maria Mater Ecclesia, Rome.
We can interpret Vatican Council II in harmony with the 'strict interpretation' of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and without the hermeneutic of rupture. This is the L.A model but it will not be acceptable at the Legion of Christ universities in Rome.-Lionel Andrades

1.I do not like to mention my name in this way but it helps to make the issue concrete and it avoids ambiguity.I write this in all humility and knowing that I am like a worm before God and that writing all this would not be possible without supernatural help.