eucharistandmission: There were no ‘mortal sins of faith’ for Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger since with Vatican Council II interpreted with the Fake Premise a break was produced with the Creeds, Catechisms EENS and the old theology which supported ecclesiocenterism

Sunday, November 28, 2021

There were no ‘mortal sins of faith’ for Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger since with Vatican Council II interpreted with the Fake Premise a break was produced with the Creeds, Catechisms EENS and the old theology which supported ecclesiocenterism

There were no ‘mortal sins of faith’ for Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger since with Vatican Council II interpreted with the Fake Premise (confusing invisible cases as being physically visible, so there were literal cases of LG 14 (baptism of desire) and LG 16 (invincible ignorance) a break was produced with the Creeds, Catechisms and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) and the old theology which supported ecclesiocenterism. The Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX was made obsolete.

So in an interview with the daily Avvenire Pope Benedict said that EENS today was no more like it was for the missionaries in the 16^th century. There was ‘a development’ for him with Vatican Council II- of course interpreted with the False Premise.

He meant there is ‘known salvation’ outside the Catholic Church, in specific cases.There were allegedly physically visible non Catholics saved without Catholic faith and the baptism of water(AG 7/LG 14).So 16^th century EENS had exceptions for him. This was his New Theology for over 50 years.De fide teachings were now of the past. They had become ‘the past Magisterium’ for Archbishop Arthur Roche. Cardinal Malcolm Ranjit told me that we do not follow the Syllabus of Errors. Vatican Council II (LG 14) contradicts EENS Cardinal Gerhard Muller told Edward Pentin.

So rejecting the Athanasius Creed was no more a mortal sin.

Rejecting the dogma EENS as it was known to the Church Fathers and popes in the Middle Ages was no more a mortal sin.

Changing the understanding of the Nicene and Apostles Creed was understandable. It was not a sin after Vatican Council II (irrational).

Since there is ‘known salvation’ outside the Church in specific cases : particular people were seen without faith and baptism in Heaven and on earth, for them to be exceptions for EENS, the ecclesiology of the Church was now different.So Cardinal Walter Kasper asked why could the Eucharist not be given to the divorced and remarried? Cardinal Claudio Hummes at the Amazon Synod indicated that there was no more exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church and that the traditionalists could not understand this since they could not understand Vatican Council II ( irrational, of course).The German Synod said Cardinal Reinhardt Marx had its foundation on Vatican Council II.

So now Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke’s Profession of Faith and mine are different. He uses the same False Premise as the liberals. For me the Nicene Creed says, “I believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins”. It refers to a visible baptism, the baptism of water which is repeatable. For everyone else at the Novus Ordo Mass, it is, “I believe in three or more physically visible and known baptisms.They exclude the baptism of water in the Catholic Church. They are desire, blood, invincible ignorance etc.”

For me the Holy Spirit guides the Church to say outside the Church there is no salvation. This was the understanding of the Apostles Creed over the centuries when it was said “I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Holy Catholic Church”. Now for everyone, the Holy Spirit guides the Catholic Church to say outside the Church there is salvation. This is a new doctrine. The dogma EENS has been rejected.

So we no more have the original four marks of the Church (one, holy, Catholic and Apostolic) of the Nicene Creed.

I affirm the Athanasius Creed. Pope Benedict rejects it.

I am in harmony with the past Magisterium.Pope Benedict is in schism.

My interpretation of the Catechisms, Syllabus of Errors and other Magisterial Documents. Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke is irrational.

So how can Pope Benedict offer Holy Mass while living in this continuous state of the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition? He is off key with the Athanasius Creed, the Syllabus of Errors, the Catechism of Pope Pius X (24 Q, 27Q)...

He is in schism and heresy for those who interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise and – discern.

How could he and Cardinal Luis Ladaria sj accept the Letter of the Holy Office 1949 to the Archbishop of Boston which interpreted the baptism of desire and invincible ignorance with the False Premise ? Pope Benedict needs to recant. He needs absolution in the Confession before he offers Holy Mass.-Lionel Andrades