The Vigano Tapes (Number 12) on Vatican Council II in which Dr. Robert Moynihan interview’s of Archbishop Carlo Vigano would please the liberals and ecclesiastics. Since they both project Vatican Council Council as a break with Tradition.They are going along with the doctrinal confusion.They are both on the side of the Masons whom they would criticize in other contexts.They are re-inforning the politically correct interpretation of Vatican Council II held in the Church. They do not mention the rational premise.
Dr. Robert Moynihan is not challending Archbishop
Vigano to see Vatican Council II interpreted with the 1) blue left
hand side rational column 2) the rational premise,inference and conclusion and
the 3) the hypothetical passages not being exceptions to the orthodox passages
in Vatican Council II.
They are both maintaining the
politically correct status quo on Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 25, 2021
Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano could give Matteo Salvini’s Lega party a push as campaign continues for the Rome Mayoral elections . The Vatican Council II of the Left, must be made an issue.
Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano could give Matteo Salvini’s Lega party a push as campaign continues for the Rome Mayoral elections . The Vatican Council II of the Left, must be made an issue.
Archbishop Vigano with his independent status within the Church could give the Lega Salvini a plug in .He must tell Salvini to re-interpret Vatican Council II. Then he can see politics change. The Council can be red with these graphic three teaching models, which de politicize it.
1) The blue left hand side rational column.
2) The rational premise, inference and conclusion.
3) The hypothetical passages in Vatican Council II marked in red, not being exceptions to the orthodox passages , marked in blue.
So there is no more a rupture with the past exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church. The old theology has been the basis for the proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation( Quas Primas). This ties the hands of leftist bishops and priests.They cannot use the Vatican Council II(irrational) political, yellow card. More people now know the truth.The Left cannot cite the Council to put down a Catholic voter who affirms exclusivist salvation and the Social Reign of Christ the King.The Council can be interpreted with the rational premise and the game changes. Politics changes.The Council will no more be leftist.It will no more claim that there is known salvation outside the Church.
With the rational premise the Left can no more pretend that there are visible cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church, without faith and the baptism of water in 2021.If there are no physically visible cases in the present times, then there are no practical exceptions to the past exclusivist ecclesiology.So now the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and the Syllabus of Errors can be supported and so also the Proclamation of the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation.This is related to the political campaign for Mayor underway in Rome.
With Vatican Council II (rational) the Church would be telling Catholics to vote only for a Catholic political party since the issue is saving souls from going to Hell. Catholics have an obligation. Christ must be the center of political legislation and not man.
This is now possible without any one citing Vatican Council II ( irrational ) in opposition.Christ must no more be restricted to the liturgy in the many beautiful churches in Rome.They are under leftist controlled ‘Heritage Committees’, which are ideological.
Catholics have an obligation to vote for a political party or candidate, which/who wants Christ (as known in the Catholic Church over the centuries in Rome) to be a center of all politics and campaigning.We cannot separate Christ from the Church or the Church from the State. -Lionel Andrades
_________________
______________________________
SEPTEMBER 25, 2021
When the Council is dogmatic and traditional, collegiality, synodality, ecumenism and religious liberty are no more an issue.The popes, cardinals and bishops have to interpret the Council rationally and traditionally
Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano could choose to interpret Vatican Council II with 1) the blue left hand side rational column, 2) the rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion and 3) the red ( hypothetical) passages in Vatican Council II not being practical exceptions to the blue ( orthodox ) passages.
The Council then becomes dogmatic, ecclesiocentric and traditional. It is in harmony with the Syllabus of Errors on an ecumenism of return, with no exceptions and the dogma, outside the Church there is no salvation.This was the traditional theological basis for proclaiming the Social Reign of Christ the King in all political legislation, to save the maximum number of souls from going to Hell.
When the Council is dogmatic and traditional, collegiality, synodality, ecumenism and religious liberty are no more an issue.The popes, cardinals and bishops have to interpret the Council rationally and traditionally.-Lionel Andrades
________________________________________
SEPTEMBER 24, 2021
There is a Specific Error in Vatican Council II and Pope Paul VI looked the other side or did not know about it.Now people know.This is after some 50 years.The people know what the traditionalists did not know – that a false premise was used for political reasons to interpret Vatican Council II. Archbishop Vigano also does not know the specific cause
There is a Specific Error in Vatican Council II and Pope Paul VI looked the other side or did not know about it.Now people know.This is after some 50 years.The people know what the traditionalists did not know – that a false premise was used for political reasons to interpret Vatican Council II. Archbishop Vigano in the video above also does not know the specific cause. He sees the results of Vatican Council II . He knows that there is a break with the past exclusivist ecclesiology.He does not know that the fault lies with his irrational interpretation. He chooses the irrational option like Pope Francis and Pope Benedict but also like Cardinal Alfredo Ottaviani and Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.
A false break with Catholic Tradition, was sought, especially a break with extra ecclesiam nulla salus and so the Council was called.The popes Pius XII and John XXIII permitted the mistake in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston(LOHO).They did not check the mistake in the LOHO.
Now why should Catholics interpret Vatican Council II with a fake premise, inference and non traditional conclusion instead of the rational premise, inference and traditional conclusion ? We have a choice.
See the graphics with the Two Columns. You don’t have to be a theologian to understand it. If you choose the blue left hand side rational column to interpret Vatican Council II (LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22 etc)then there is no break with the past exclusivist concept of salvation. Since no objective exceptions are projected for extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS).
If you choose the red right hand side irrational column which uses a false premise, of course, there will be a rupture with the popes and saints over the centuries. EENS is finished.
It’s simple. Choose the rational column. Vatican Council II should no more be controversial, at least not for the conservative and traditional Catholic.
We don’t have to make the same mistake as Pope Paul VI. We have a choice.
The people did not know about this at Dijon, France or they would tell Bishop Roland Minnerath to accept Vatican Council II and come back to the Catholic faith.They still don’t know about it and at their weekly protests outside the Nuncio’s office in Paris.
Pope Francis wants every one to accept the political Left Vatican Council II with the objective error. The Catechechtical Centers and Bishops Conferences’ follow him. The protests at the Nuncio's office, or even before the Catechectical Centers, should also say, ‘Pope Francis please interpret Vatican Council II with the rational premise and come back to Tradition’.
Catholic orthodoxy does not depend upon the Latin Mass but the use of the rational premise to interpret Magisterial documents.Once this is clear the progressivism, and liberalism collapses.It’s foundation was built upon error. There is no theological division in the Church when the error is avoided.
With the rational premise there is no division since no liberalism is possible. There cannot be 'a development of doctrine' based upon a hidden falsehood. So the Nuncio should be told to use the rational premise.He is now unethical.
“Why is Bishop Roland Minnerath allowed to offer Holy Mass?”, would be the rational question. This should have been asked by the laity in Dijone, France, with their banners.Since Minnerath is not using the rational premise to interpret Vatican Council II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church(846,1257), extra ecclesiam nulla salus, with no known exceptions and the Syllabus of Errors, with no known exceptions.He does not affirm an ecumenism of return, with no known exceptions even though Unitatis Redintigratio does not mention any exceptions. UR 3 is hypothetical and does not contradict EENS in 2021.It is not a practical exception.He does not affirm the Catechism of Pope Pius X, 24Q,27Q even though there are no practical exceptions mentioned in the Council-text.He does not affirm the Social Reign of Christ the King in all politics with the non separation of Church and State even though Vatican Council II is ecclesiocentric, traditional and dogmatic.He has rejected the Athanasius Creed and changed the understanding of the Apostles and Nicene Creed.So how can Pope Francis and Pope Benedict, like Bishop Roland Minnerath, offer Holy Mass with this impediment? The placards do not ask.
The lay people can now organise Traditional Mission with an ecclesiocentric Vatican Council II(AG 7). The Council tells us that all non Catholics are oriented to Hell without faith and the baptism of water (AG 7). There are no objective exceptions to Ad Gentes 7. It says all need faith and baptism for salvation.All, in 2021 and not just those who know or do not know about Jesus and the Church, those who are in invincible ignorance or are not in ignorance.All in general.
There are no exceptions to AG 7 or EENS mentioned in Vatican Council II.Lay Catholics can go on Mission. They do not have to wait for their bishop.Catholic Tradition is an ally.The bishop can no more bring out the Vatican Council II-card to oppose them.Instead its vice versa.Tell the bishop that Vatican Council II supports the exclusivist ecclesiology of the Church.He must be a good example of obedience.There is no more a rupture with the Church of St. Francis of Assisi, St. Catherine of Siena and St. Teresa of Avila.The Minneraths can no more use the Council to block Tradition and promote a theology of religious pluralism.
The present two popes need to announce that Pope Paul VI made an objective error, a specific error and the popes who followed him ignored it.So the whole Church, all who avoid the error, can go back to Tradition- and not only those who attend the Latin Mass.
Yes the whole Church. So even those who go for Holy Mass in the vernacular, should be outside the Nuncio’s office in Paris,appealing to also Le Pen, to correct the common mistake in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.-Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 24, 2021
Pope Paul VI brought ‘the smoke of Satan’ into the Church when he interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally instead of rationally. He used the false premise instead of the rational option.Pope Francis and Pope Benedict must announce that Pope Paul VI made an objective error.They must correct the mistake
Pope Paul VI brought ‘the smoke of Satan’ into the Church when he interpreted Vatican Council II irrationally instead of rationally. He used the false premise instead of the rational option.Pope Francis and Pope Benedict must announce that Pope Paul VI made an objective error which overlooked in the 1949 Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston.So Catholics today are free to correct his error and interpret the Council with the rational premise, inference and conclusion.
There are orthodox passages in the Council-text which support the past ecclesiocentrism of the Church whle hypothetical cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc are not objective exceptions in 1965-2021.Vatican Council II is dogmatic and not just a pastoral Council. It is in harmony withy the 16th century interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) with no known exceptions. Ad Gentes 7 says all need faith and baptism for salvation.It supports the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX on an ecumenism of return with no known exceptions mentioned in the Council.( UR 3 is hypothetical and theoretical only and not an exception to EENS).It supports the Catechism of Pope Pius X , 24Q,27Q on other religions not being paths to salvation( though there may be good and holy things in them-NA 2).So all need to convert into the Church with faith and baptism( AG 7, Athanasius Creed etc).
The popes need to announce that the interpretation of Vatican Council II(LG 14) by Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall is rational and their conclusion is traditional, non schismatic and non heretical.
Pope Paul VI could also have been rational, non schismatic and non heretical. He could have announced that LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are always hypothetical and exist only in our mind. So there would be no New Theology which says outside the Catholic Church there is salvation, since EENS is obsolete, with alleged objective examples of salvation outside the Church(Objective cases are LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, etc).
Now Pope Francis and Pope Benedict must formally correct the mistake.They cannot use the false premise which I have explained with Two Columns and other graphics.
When Vatican Council II is interpreted with the blue rational left hand side column there is a hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition(EENS, Syllabus, Athanasius Creed etc).
When Vatican Council II is interpreted with the red irrational right hand side column then there is a break with the past.Pope Paul VI made a bad choice. The Church still follows the mistake and so do the present two popes.
So the French Bishops Conference , for example, like those in other countries in collegiality with the two popes, must acknowledge that Pope Paul VI made a mistake. They must then re-interpret Vatican Council II rationally.Catholics in France should do the same and not wait for the bishops to correct the objective mistake.
Lay Catholics in France must interpret Vatican Council II like Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall and not the red right hand column users like Karl Rahner, Yves Congar, John Courtney Murray, Joseph Ratzinger, Richard Cushing, Alfredo Ottaviani and Marcel Lefebvre.
The popes need to correct the error common on the Internet and theological journals and articles, especially in Germany and the USA.-Lionel Andrades
SEPTEMBER 23, 2021
Pope Francis and Pope Benedict could correct the error in Wikipedia and Internet resources and the German theological and catechetical publications
SEPTEMBER 22, 2021
Pope Francis and Pope Benedict brazenly claim that the Council is innovative and a break with Tradition when they have chosen a false premise to create the innovation.It’s their irrational premise which makes the Council innovative and schismatic.The College of Cardinals must correct this mistake.It has spread throughout the Catholic Church https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/09/pope-francis-and-pope-benedict-brazenly.html
AUGUST 29, 2021
Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Dr. Taylor Marshall say there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire but the German Synodal path is based upon there being literal cases of the baptism of desire (LG 14) in the present times
Bishop Athanasius Schneider in an interview with Dr. Taylor Marshall has said that there are no literal cases of the baptism of desire in the present times(2021). So LG 14 ( Case of the Catechumen) would be a hypothetical and speculative case only. But for Cardinal Marx this is not his interpretation of Vatican Council II upon which is based the German Synodal Way.For him LG 14 and also LG 16, UR 3, NA2, GS 22, LG 16,LG 8 would refer to literal cases of non Catholics in the present times (1965-2021) saved without ‘faith and baptism’(AG 7), outside the Church. It is only in this way that he can avoid affirming Catholic Tradition (EENS, Syllabus of Errors etc).
If the Germans interpreted LG 14 like Bishop Athanasius Schneider there would be no theological bases for the German Synodal Breakaway.
In France, Bishop Roland Mitterand in Dijon, wrote his books on the Concordats and the theology of religious pluralism by interpreting LG 14 irrationally.The French Bishops’ Conference must be asked to clarify that the baptism of desire is always hypothetical, theoretical and invisible for us human beings.In principle, hypothetical cases of LG 14, LG 16 etc cannot be practical exceptions in 2021 to Tradition ( Catechism of Pope Pius X, Council of Trent etc).
Like the French, Cardinal Peter Erdo in Hungary and the Hungarian Bishops’ Conference, could also be confusing the “implicit baptism of desire” of St. Thomas Aquinas as being explicit in the present times.
In Poland, the National Catechetical Center is in schism with the past Magisterium, since with visible cases of the baptism of desire, a hermeneutic of rupture is created with the Athanasius Creed, the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24Q,27Q).They need to issue a statement on this issue.
Their Episcopal Conference, like those all over the world, interpret the baptism of desire with a fake and not rational premise . So there is a fake break with Catholic Tradition.
The Schneider-Marshall video is really asking the U.S bishops to be ethical and honest.They are saying that the cardinals and bishops in Britain are also dishonest, when they project the baptism of desire as an exception to EENS according to the missionaries and Magisterium of the 16th century.
The bishops in Switzerland had also been asking the Society of St. Pius X to interpret the baptism of desire with the irrationality mentioned by Bishop Schneider, and then to accept the non traditional conclusion.This is not Catholic.
Pope Benedict did not grant canonical recognition to the SSPX and said it was a doctrinal issue.Bishop Charles Morerod in Switzerland would not allow the SSPX to use the churches there, and said it was a doctrinal issue. They had to continue to interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise and accept the non traditional conclusion, like the liberals.
Pope Benedict needs to be honest.He needs to apologize to the SSPX.-Lionel Andrades
________________
Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution Lumen gentium, 14: "They could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it, or to remain in it."
_______________________
_______________________
2
CHRISTIANITY AND THE WORLD RELIGIONS BY THE INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION (1997)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment