-Lionel Andrades
Sunday, December 8, 2019
It's heresy, scandal and sacrilege from the top to the rest of the Church. The two living popes do not interpret Vatican Council II rationally.They could if they wanted.
It's heresy, scandal and sacrilege from the top to the rest of the Church. The two living popes do not interpret Vatican Council II rationally.They could if they wanted. The Council would support extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) according to the missionaries of the 16th century. The popes would then be interpreting the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood (BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) rationally. It's easy. The Creeds and Catechisms would be traditional for the popes. The Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX would no more be obsolete.
FIRST CLASS HERESY
But - instead we have popes in first class heresy. A scandal. They are in schism with the popes over the centuries, on ecclesiology. Manifest schism.The evidence is there on line.
Holy Mass for the popes, cardinals, bishops and priests could be a sacrilege.There would be mortal sins of faith at Mass.
The Oath of Fidelity for Bishops and the Profession of Faith by religious today are meaningless. Since Magisterial documents have a different meaning. This is the result of a false premise being used by Catholics in general, led by the popes.
Vocations to the religious life have rejected de fide teachings. Evangelisation does not say membership in the Church is necessary to avoid Hell.
I choose to be rational and traditional.
NO AMBIGUITY IN VATICAN COUNCIL II
NO AMBIGUITY IN VATICAN COUNCIL II
As a Catholic. I choose to interpret Vatican Council II rationally. So there is no break with Tradition.This is not choosing only the orthodox passages and re-interpreting the ambiguous and Cushingite passages as being exceptions to the orthodox passages. This too would be using the false premise.
For me the ambiguous passages are hypothetical only. So they do not contradict the passages which support exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. The Council Fathers made a mistake when they included the ambiguous passages in Vatican Council II. They assumed that they were objective exceptions to Feeneyite EENS.
So even with their mistake in the Council text we can interpret Vatican Council Ii rationally only. It is orthodox with no ambiguous passages being exceptions.
FALSE PREMISE CREATES AMBIGUITY
FALSE PREMISE CREATES AMBIGUITY
I interpret the Creeds and Catechisms without the false premise.It is the false premise which creates the ambiguity.For me there is no ambiguity.There is a continuity with the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology of the Church.For Cardinal Kasper and Koch there is ambiguity. Since they choose to use the irrational premise.
EENS today for me, is the same as that of the 16th century.
There is no development with Vatican Council II, for me. I avoid the invisible-people-are - visible premise.
BOD, BOB and I.I always refer to invisible and hypothetical cases only.So there is no change in the Nicene Creed. I am not inoculated with the error from the Petrine Office as is the rest of the Church.Rationality is the antidote.
But the popes do not do the same. So we have schismatic popes in first class heresy.This is a scandal for the rest of the Church, following their mortal sin.
We have heresy at the theological and doctrinal level. It is public.It is repeated knowingly. Reports on line, are ignored.
EVIDENCE
EVIDENCE
The evidence was there in two theological papers of the International Theological Commission.It was approved by Cardinal Ratzinger. The same there are exceptions-to -EENs error is their in the book on the ecclesiology of Cardinal Ratzinger. He could not see the Church as the Ark of Noah in which all need to enter.Since for him BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8 etc were exceptions to EENS for him. Upon this error he created his New Theology.He has said it officially. EENS for him was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16th century.So at one time the 'magisterium' was wrong.
DEVELOPMENT WITH FALSE PREMISE
DEVELOPMENT WITH FALSE PREMISE
He used a false premise to create a non traditional inference and then called it ' a development' with Vatican Council II.So there is a new ecclesiology for him - a development. It's foundation is based upon confusing what is invisible as being visible, subjective as being objective, hypothetical as being real and physically visible in the present times.
NOT LUMEN FIDEI
NOT LUMEN FIDEI
The evidence for Pope Francis' heresy is there in Lumen Fidei which rejects the dogma EENS, the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return. Pope Francis assumes BOD etc are visible examples of salvation outside the Church.Otherwise how could they be exceptions to EENS. So with this irrationality he interprets the Council and creates the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition.This was how they did it for 50 years.Now we know.
Protestants, for me, need to convert into the Catholic Church with Catholic faith and the baptism of water(AG 7).
The error was repeated at Abu Dhabi.Since Pope Francis uses the false premise to interpret Vatican Council II and other magisterial documents, as does Pope Benedict, the Abu Dhabi declaration does not say that non Catholics Christians, are oriented to the fires of Hell, without faith and baptism(AG 7, LG 14).He does not announce that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, GS 22 etc,refer to exceptions in 2019.
EVANGELII GAUDIUM KERGYMA
EVANGELII GAUDIUM KERGYMA
Pope Francis' Evangelii Gaudium presents the kerygma for salvation, without the necessity of membership in St. Ignatius of Loyola's hierarchical Church.
The Working Paper of the Amazon Synod rejected exclusive salvation.Again with the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.Cardinal Hummes criticized the Society of St. Pius X for not accepting this irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II.All the pagans in the Amazon, are oriented to Hell, for me. They are outside the Church according to Vatican Council II(AG 7), for me.Since the Conciliar Church supports exclusive salvation. Vatican Council II supports Tradition.
This is Vatican Council II without mixing up what is invisible as being visible.
NICENE CREED CHANGED
NICENE CREED CHANGED
Since BOD,BOB and I.I are exceptions to EENS for the two popes, the Nicene Creed for the faithful becomes, "I believe in three or more known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins( desire, blood and ignorance) and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church".
This is the Nicene Creed for all juridical persons for whom BOD, BOB and I.I are exceptions to EENS.Bishops, Superiors, Rectors etc have to mouth heresy and schism to be good standing, with the two popes and their Curia.They all have to interpret the Council with the false premise, as was initiated by Pope Paul VI.
THEY WANTED A RUPTURE
THEY WANTED A RUPTURE
Even Pope John Paul II along with Cardinal Ratzinger interpreted the Council with the false premise, as did Archbishop Lefebvre.They did not tell Lefebvre and the excommunicated bishops of the SSPX, that the Council could be interpreted without the false premise and the conclusion would be traditional.Vatican Council II would not be a rupture with Tradition. They wanted a rupture with Tradition.
The 'magisterium' wanted a rupture.When Pope Benedict announced that EENS was no more like it was in the 16th century( Avvenire, March 2016) he wanted a rupture. When Cardinal Ladaria suggested that Lumen Gentium 8 was an exception to the past ecclesiology and exclusive salvation(Placuet Deo Press Conference, 2016), he wanted a rupture.
Now as a norm de fide teachings on faith and morals have been changed with the use of that false premise.There is an artificial rupture.But we can avoid this rupture with the past. Since we know what causes it.
SOME THINGS ARE INVISIBLE
SOME THINGS ARE INVISIBLE
1. We humans cannot know any one saved in BOD, BOB and I.I outside the Church. So BOD, BOB and I.I are not exceptions to EENS. This is a faith-issue.This mix up is the cause of the rupture.
2. We humans cannot know of any one divorced and re-married , in manifest mortal sin, who is not in mortal sin and who could be given the Eucharist.This is a moral issue.
If there are exceptions in either case it could only be judged by God.This subjectivity is Amoris Laetitia is a rupture with traditional moral theology.
CARDINALS OVERLOOK IT
CARDINALS OVERLOOK IT
The change in the faith-issue is overlooked by all the cardinals.The change in morals is overlooked by most cardinals.The cardinals too are in schism, with the popes over history, on EENS. For me, there are no exceptions to EENS mentioned in Vatican Council for them there are.This is the difference between Feeneyism and Cushingism( see the tags on the right hand bar).
NEW STUFF IS DECEPTION
NEW STUFF IS DECEPTION
So there is a new ecclesiology, new ecumenism, new evangelisation. This is a scandal.Mass would be a sacrilege for the popes, cardinals, bishops and priests. All this 'new stuff' is deception. It is based upon a false premise.
Even for bishops and priests, re-interpreting Vatican Council II falsely,would be an impediment to offering Holy Mass.
But Rome can come back to the Faith.
Rome can come back to the Faith, I repeat and it is easy.
There is hope. We have identified the precise factor which causes the hermeneutic of rupture. We can avoid it.
There is hope. We have identified the precise factor which causes the hermeneutic of rupture. We can avoid it.
Things are finally clear now.
ANNOUNCEMENT NEEDED
ANNOUNCEMENT NEEDED
A.The popes need to announce that there are no physically visible cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church with the BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc.So there are no exceptions to the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return .There can be no development of doctrine based upon a false premise. Cardinal Newman indicated that a doctrine can develop only before it is a dogma.There can be no development on the understanding of the Trinity any more.
For Pope Francis and Pope Benedict and the liberals , even dogmas like EENS have developed with alleged exceptions.
B. We humans cannot judge the three conditions for mortal sin. They can only be known to God.So a mortal sin is still a mortal sin.The objective condition of sin indicates the subjective intent of the sinner( Veritatis Spendor, Pope John Paul II).The exception does not make the norm.
So there is no theological basis for the change in faith and morals.-Lionel Andrades
DECEMBER 7, 2019
Pope John Paul II, Pope Benedict and Pope Francis have interpreted Vatican Council II as a rupture with Tradition. This is heresy.
DECEMBER 7, 2019
What do we do when the present two popes are in manifest mortal sin ?
DECEMBER 7, 2019
All the popes since Pius XII to Francis have made this mistake. No cardinal or bishop has corrected the mistake. Not a single one.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/12/all-popes-since-pius-xii-to-francis.html
DECEMBER 7, 2019
Popes and ecclesiastics today make an error in the interpretation of Vatican Council II
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/12/popes-and-ecclesiastics-today-make.html
DECEMBER 6, 2019
Andrea Tornielli like Edward Pentin and the bishop of Regensburg promote the false theology, Cushingite theology of Pope Benedict, which is being followed by Pope Francis.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/12/andrea-tornielli-like-edward-pentin-and.html
_____________________________
NOVEMBER 12, 2019
At Oxford University 50 years after Vatican Council II they still do not have an insight into their collective error.Students at Oxford, thousands of them, did not think correctly and were going along with the masses, in their error. This centre of learning was in ignorance.
TERMS CLARIFIED
BOD( Baptism of Desire . Case of the unknown cathechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is allegedly saved and now in Heaven).
BOB (Baptism of Blood. The case of unknown person who is in Heaven as a martyr without the baptism of water).
I.I (Invincible ignorance: The case of an unknown non Catholics who is in Heaven without faith and baptism and instead in invincible ignorance).
LG 8 ( Lumen Gentium 8: The case of the unknown person saved outside the Church with 'elements of sanctification and truth' or where the true Church of Christ allegedly subsists.
LG 14 (Lumen Gentium 14: Baptism of Desire . Case of the unknown cathechumen who desires the baptism of water but dies before he receives it and is allegedly saved and now in Heaven).
LG 16 ( Lumen Gentium 16: The case of the unknown person saved outside the Church in invincible ignorance and who is now in Heaven without faith and the baptism of water).
UR 3 (Unitatitis Redintigratiio 3, Vatican Council II : The case of the unknown Christian, who is saved in his religions without Catholic faith or the baptism of water in the Catholic Church and is allegedly known to someone on earth who has seen him or her in Heaven).
NA 2( Nostra Aetate 2: The case of the unknown non Catholic saved outside the Catholic Church without faith and baptism. He or she is saved with good and holy things in other religion or with the a ray of that Truth which enlightens all mankind.
GS 22 (Gaudium et Specs 22. The case of the unknown non Catholic who is saved outside the Catholic Church. He or she is saved without faith and baptism but with goodwill.
NOVEMBER 11, 2019
The Oxford University Press has produced many books on Vatican Council II based upon a false premise. A deceptive rupture is created with Catholic Tradition
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2019/11/the-oxford-university-press-has.html
NOVEMBER 9, 2019
The Rector(Master) at the St.Benet Hall, Oxford University, supports misinformation on Vatican Council II and Catholic traditional teaching.He overlooks Dr.Joseph Shaw's mistake.
___________________________________
FALSE PREMISE DEFINED
Their false premise is:-
1. Invisible people are visible.
2.Unknown case of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance are personally known.
3.The unknown case of the catechumen who desired the baptism of water but dies before he received it and is saved, is a personally known person.
4.There is known salvation outside the Catholic Church for us human beings.
5.We can see people in Heaven saved without the baptism of water.
6.We can physically see non Catholics in Heaven and on earth who are saved without 'faith and baptism'(AG 7).
7.There are non Catholics who are dead- men visible and walking who are saved outside the Church.
8.There are known people in invincible ignorance through no fault of their own, who are saved.
9.There are some Anglicans and Protestants whom we know who are going to Heaven even though they are outside the Catholic Church.
10.There are some non Catholics whom we know, who are dead, and now are in Heaven, even though they were not Catholic.
With the false premise there are 'objective exceptions' to EENS. There are visible exceptions to the Athanasius Creed, the Nicene Creed is changed, there is a new understanding of the Nicene Creed etc :-
1. The Athanasius Creed which says outside the Church there is no salvation is contradicted.
2. The Nicene Creed in which we say, 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins' over the centuries referred to only one known baptism, the baptism of water.The baptism of desire etc cannot be given to someone like the baptism of water.But now the understanding is ' I believe in three or more known baptisms for the forgiveness of sins ( desire,blood and ignorance) and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church'.
3. The Apostles Creed says ' we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church'. Over the centuries it was understood that the Holy Spirit guided the Catholic Church and taught that there was no salvation outside the Church.Now unknown cases of the baptism of desire, baptism of blood and being saved in invincible ignorance, and LG 8, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II, are assumd to be objective examples of salvation outside the Church.
4.In the past three Church Councils defined the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) in the extraordinary Magisterium .It was an 'infallible teaching' for Pope Pius X( Letter of the Holy Offie 1949).Now it is obsolete with their being alleged known salvation outside the Church.
5.Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church are interpreted with the false premise so they become a rupture with EENS( Feeneyite), the Syllabus of Errors, Athanasius Creed etc.
6.With the false premise the Catechism of Pope Pius X contradict itself. It affirms the strict interpretation of EENS while invincible invincible ignorance is intepreted as referring to personally known non Catholics saved outside the Chuch.Invincible ignorance is not seen as a hypothetical case only.
7.Redemptoris Missio, Dominus Iesus, Ecclesia in Asia, Balamand Declaration etc were all written upholding the false premise. They did not support exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church. So in a subtle way they contradicted EENS(Feeneyite), the Athanasius Creed etc. They did not support the past ecclesiology and an ecumenism of return.They are Christological without the traditional ecclesiocentric ecclesiology. It's Christ without the necessity of membership in the Catholic Church for salvation.
8. Traditional mission based upon exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church is rejected. Since with the false premise, there is salvation outside the Church.
9.Inter faith marriages which are not Sacraments are common held.It is no more adultery. Since the non Catholic spouse could be saved outside the Church it is assumed. A posibility which could only be known to God is assumed to be a practical exception to EENS and a literally known case of salvation outside the Church in a personal case.
10. There is a new heretical ecclesiology at Holy Mass in all the rites and liturgies. The Latin Mass today does not have the same exclusivist ecclesiology of the Tridentine Rite Mass of the missionaries in the 16th century.
__________________________________________________________________
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
