The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) want Catholics to interpret Magisterial documents (Creeds,Catechisms etc) with a false premise and inference.Liberals and traditionalists are doing just this.In this way there is a rupture with the past ; a schism with the popes.Confusion on doctrine and an absense of a proclamation which could result in tension and martyrdom.The popes and cardinals live comfortable.There is a new Gospel which is social,polite and compromised.The Left and Satan do not protest.
Even conservative Catholics are on the same train.Going along with it, peacefully.
This is really quiet division with the past Magisterium.It is achieved with the use of a false premise i.e invincible ignorance(I.I),the baptism of desire(BOD) and baptism of blood (BOB) are visible examples of salvation outside the Church.
Unknown cases of BOD, BOB and I.I and LG 8, LG14, LG 16, UR 3,NA 2 etc in Vatican Council II,are known exceptions to 16th century EENS.
Since there is known salvation outside the Catholic Church for the popes and tge CDF,there could be a new type of ecumenism, in which non Catholic Christians do not need to convert.
There is a new type of evangelisation in which Jesus is proclaimed without the necessity of being a members of the Church with faith and baptism,for salvation.
There is a new understanding of Church (ecclesiology) which is not missionary , exclusive and unique.
All this comes about with the use of one small premise.This is a development of doctrine with the use of one small premise.
All the books and articles on Vatican Council II have used this false premise to interpret the Creeds and to create a New Church, which is approved by the popes since Paul VI.
So the Nicene Creed is changed, the Athanasius Creed rejected and the Apostles Creed made irrelevant and meaningless.Since there can be two interpretations.One rational and the other irrational and the irrational one is used by the CDF.
Pick up any book on Vatican Council II, written by a liberal or traditionalist, and you will find a false premise, inference and conclusion.
All those numerous articles by German theologians in theological magazines, all contain the theological virus.
This can be changed. We can interpret Vatican Council II without the false premise and the Church will be traditional once again.It will be traditional for the New Catechumenal Way,the Focolares, the Charismatic Renewal and the Medugorje movement communities.
One small action and we return back to the normal past.
-Lionel Andrades
REPOST
REPOST
APRIL 13, 2019
Archbishops Morandi and Di Noia Secretaries of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF),contradict Vatican Council I on the pope being infallible ex cathedra .
Archbishops Morandi and Di Noia Secretaries of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF),contradict Vatican Council I on the pope being infallible ex cathedra .
They have changed the understanding of the Creeds which were ratified by the Church Councils.With the same irrational reasoning they have changed the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which was defined by three Church Councils.This is an error on a faith issue : exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
They have changed the understanding of the Creeds which were ratified by the Church Councils.With the same irrational reasoning they have changed the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, which was defined by three Church Councils.This is an error on a faith issue : exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
1. Ex Cathedra the popes defined extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) in three Church Councils.They did not mention any exceptions to EENS. They did not assume unknown cases of the baptism of desire(BOD), baptism of blood(BOB) and invincible ignorance(I.I) were known exceptions to the dogma outside the Church there is no salvation.It was the liberal theologians who made this error. It was there in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 and then at Vatican Council II.
This was a faith-teaching. By confusing BOD, BOB and I.I as being visible instead of invisible, the CDF Secretaries have changed magisterial documents.
They have admitted this in public. It is there on the website of the Diocese of Manchester in their correspondence with Brother Andre Marie, MICM, Prior, St. Benedict Center, New Hampshire.
2.The Church Councils ratified the Nicene Creed which says 'I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins'. For the CDF it is 'I believe in three or more known baptisms, desire, blood and ignorance, and they exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church.'
So for the CDF Secretaries there are exceptions to the dogma EENS.
3.The Athanasius Creed says outside the Church there is no salvation.The CDF says outside the Church there is salvation. There would have to be known salvation for them to say this. Since hypothetical cases are particular and known people saved outside the Church in the present times,for them.There are exceptions..BOD, BOB and I.I are examples of salvation outside the Church for them. So also is LG 8 , UR 3, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II.
In their correspondence with Brother Andre Marie MICM, the Secretaries of the CDF have stated that CCC 847-848 must be seen as exceptions to the strict interpretation of EENS.
So with this false reasoning they have rejected EENS and the Creeds. Catholics who follow the CDF follow heresy.
Cardinal Ratzinger in 1983 even changed Canon Law to make heresy the norm and orthodoxy heresy.
4) The Apostles Creed says I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church.For the CDF Secretaries the Holy Spirit teaches the Catholic Church that outside the Church there is salvation.The CDF and the Diocese of Manchester officially are telling Brother Andre Marie that he has to interpret magisterial documents like the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994), with an irrational premise( visible cases of BOD, BOB and I.I) to reject the traditional interpretation of EENS and create a rupture with the Syllabus of Errors.Again this is a faith issue.
Church Councils over the centuries are being contradicted.
So a Catholic's understanding of EENS and the Creeds is not the same today as comparied, for example, to the 16th century.
The Traditional Latin Mass is no more controversial for the CDF since it is offered with the new ecclesiology.It is heretical and a rupture with the de fide teachings of the past, as mentioned above.
I interpret EENS and the Creeds without the CDF false premise and inference. So I am back to the old ecclesiology at Mass in Latin, Italian, Greek or any Rite.It is theology and doctrine which determine ecclesiology and not liturgy. This becomes clear when the infallible teachings of the Catholic Church are not changed.-Lionel Andrades
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment