We can no more say that the Catholic Church is one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic, for all, since with or without the False Premise, two different churches exist. One is ecclesiocentric ( with the rational premise) and the other is non-ecclesiocentric ( with the irrational premise). Fr. Thomas Weinandy, Brother Andre Marie micm and Joe Sixpack(CMTV) wrote articles on the Four Marks of the Church without making the distinction between the ecclesiocentric and non-ecclesiocentric Church.They did not mention the rational premise, which takes the Church back to the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.

We can no more say that the Catholic Church is one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic, for all, since with or without the False Premise, two different churches exist.One is ecclesiocentric( with the rational premise) and the other is non-ecclesiocentric ( with the irrational premise).

Fr. Thomas Weinandy, Brother Andre Marie micm and Joe Sixpack(CMTV) wrote articles on the Four Marks of the Church without making the distinction between the ecclesiocentric and non-ecclesiocentric Church.They did not mention the rational premise, which takes the Church back to the old exclusivist ecclesiology of the Catholic Church.

Was Vatican Council II in harmony with EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX  or was it a rupture with Tradition?

For the Church Fathers and the Early Christians, the Early Catholics, the Catholic Church was ecclesiocentric.Outside the Church there was no salvation.For the present two popes the Church is no more ecclesiocentric.Outside the Church there is known salvation, there is salvation, is the irrational reasoning.So there is a New Ecclesiology, New Ecumenism, New Evangelisation etc.This is a break with the Apostles.

We no more have the old Catholic Identity.Those who have the old Catholic Identity are not in unity with the rest of the Church, the majority in the Church, who interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise.They use the New Theology.

As I have mentioned in a previous blog post, the Nouvelle Theologie  of Vatican Council II was not created  by Reginald Garangou Langridge.It was created by the Council Fathers(1965) from the False Premise of the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.That Letter rejected the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and postulated  unknown cases of the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance as being known and objective cases  and objective exceptions to Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus.So EENS was made obsolete.The New Theology was outside the Church there is salvation and the popes went along with it.

On Church Militant TV, Joe Sixpack still presents the Four Marks fo the Church( one, holy , Catholic and Apostolic), without mentioning the New Theology oriented with the Fake Premise, a Specific Error of the Council Fathers in 1965.Before Pope Pius XII the Church was clearly ecclesiocentrism in its theology. After Pius XII the Church ceased to be ecclesiocentric.None of the popes defended Fr. Leonard Feeney or affirmed the strict interpretation of EENS or the Syllabus of Errors ( with no known exceptions) and the Athanasius Creed( with no known exceptions).

I also affirm the Four Marks of the Church but my concept of Church, my ecclesiology, is different from Joe Sixpack and Cardinal Walter Kasper.

So when Traditionis Custode did not interpret Vatican Council II with the rational premise no one objected.Since their interpretation of Vatican Council II was non ecclesiocentric, like that of Pope Francis and the SSPX ( they use the false premise).

Since the popes condone the error, American foundations with the approval of the popes and the USCCB,have approved the funding of ecumenical studies at the Dominican Angelicum University, Rome only for students who are non ecclesiocentric.Only those students can study at the pontifical universities who are unethical and dishonest and use a false premise to interpret Vatican Council II.

Last Sunday politically correct with the Left homilies was delivered at Mass in Italian in Rome.There personal and political interpretation of Vatican Council II to sustain division and schism in the Church. 

Pope Francis was in schism at the National Catechectical Center, Italy( Jan 30,2021) when he said that Vatican Council II had to be accepted as he interprets Vatican Council II( with the false premise) which produces a rupture with the past Magisterium- was Magisterial.

This is schism caused with the irrational interpretation of Vatican Council II. There is a break with 'the true Church', represented by the Creeds, Catechisms, dogma EENS and other Magisterial documents, interpreted rationally.

To reject the Athanasius Creed and change the understanding of the Nicene Creed is first class heresy, in the heirarchy of truths of Pope John Paul II ( Ad Tuendum Fidem). It is schism in the Church.Pope Francis in the Letter which accompanied  Traditionis Custode, interpreted Vatican Council II with a fake premise to create a false rupture with Tradition and he calls it the work of the Holy Spirit.

How can the Holy Spirit make an objective mistake and use a false premise to interpret Lumen Gentium 14( baptism of desire) and Lumen Gentium 16( invincible ignorance), for example ?

For me  LG 14 and LG 16 refer to hypothetical and theoretical  cases always.They are always speculative and not real people saved outside the Church in the present times, 1965-2021. This is something obvious.

How can LG 14, LG 16 etc be exceptions to EENS, the Athanasius Creed and the Syllabus of Errors ? Yet this is how he interprets Vatican Council II to reject ecclesiocentrism.This is different from the rational way I interpret the Council and consider it Magisterial. It is not a rupture with the past Magisterium. Pope Francis cannot say the same.

I am still in the one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church whose ecclesiology and theology does not change. -Lionel Andrades