They were consultants for the Franciscans of the Immaculate. Now they need to correct their mistake. Fr. Serafino Lanzetta and Roberto dei Mattei did not know what precisely caused the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition in Vatican Council II

 They were consultants for the Franciscans of the Immaculate. Now they need to correct their mistake. Fr. Serafino Lanzetta and Roberto dei Mattei did not know what precisely caused the hermeneutic of rupture with Tradition in Vatican Council II. For many it still is Vatican Council II or Holy Mass in the vernacular. They would read Vatican Council II with some passages supporting tradition and others contradicting it. This is a sign that they were using the False Premise. The Letter of the Holy Office 1949 conditioning was upon them. They can now correct their mistake and move on.

For me LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc. are always hypothetical and so are not practical exceptions for the dogma EENS (with no exceptions), the Athanasius Creed (with no exceptions), and the Syllabus of Errors (with no exceptions), which I affirm. 

For the both of them LG 8 etc. are exceptions for EENS and so they imply that there are physically visible and known people in the present times, for them to be exceptions. False premise.So like the liberals and the Lefebvrists they reject the strict interpretation of EENS.They infer that there are exceptions. False Inference. The Syllabus of Errors has exceptions for them and the Catechism of Pope Pius IX contradicts itself (29 Q invincible ignorance versus 24Q and 27Q, outside the Church no salvation).So Vatican Council II contradicts Tradition is there False Conclusion.

Fr. Serafino Lanzetta like the English bishops does not interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise ( invisible cases are only invisible) and so does not affirm the Athanasius Creed ( with no exceptions) while Roberto dei Mattei like the Italian bishops will not interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise. So he does not have to affirm Feeneyite EENS.

Their analysis of the Council was objectively flawed. Their books carry the common fake premise-germ and they are supported by the Left. They are allowed to write books and speak at conferences since they are not Feeneyite. They call a dogmatic interpretation of the Council pastoral (like Pope Paul VI) and continuity with Tradition is projected as a rupture (as did Pope Paul VI).

The Franciscans of the Immaculate are now free to interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise at Holy Mass in any rite and have a moral obligation to not interpret the Council, the Creeds and Catechisms with the Fake Premise. They can choose the hermeneutic of continuity with Tradition. Even at the Novus Ordo Mass catechesis can be traditional since Vatican Council II is traditional and exclusivist with the Rational Premise.

They could appeal to the popes, cardinals 

and bishops and apostolic visitors to also 

interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise and become traditionalist and conservative religious like them.-Lionel Andrades

DECEMBER 18, 2021

The Franciscans of the Immaculate are free now to interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise at Holy Mass in any rite. They have a moral obligation not to interpret the Council, Creeds and Catechisms with the False Premise.

 

The Franciscans of the Immaculate are free now to interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise at Holy Mass in any rite. They have a moral obligation not to interpret the Council, Creeds and Catechisms with the False Premise.

Traditional beliefs do not depend upon the Latin Mass but the Rational Premise used in the interpretation of Vatican Council II.So even at the Novus Ordo Mass catechesis can be traditional since Vatican Council II is traditional.

It was only the Council interpreted with the Fale Premise by Archbishop Arthur Roche which created his ‘new Magisterium’. Otherwise there is no rupture with ecclesiocentric  passages in the Roman Ritual of 1580.

At  Easter in 2022 at Holy Mass in Latin or vernacular , Vatican Council II can be interpreted with the Rational Premise and there will no more be a rupture with the past ecclesiocentric ecclesiology or any passage of the Roman Missal as it was used over the centuries.-Lionel Andrades

DECEMBER 17, 2021

Now the Franciscans of the Immaculate are in a position to ask the cardinals, bishops and the Commissar to please accept Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise and not impose the False Premise upon them.

 

Now the Franciscans of the Immaculate are in a position to ask the cardinals, bishops and the Commissar to please accept Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise and not impose the False Premise upon them. They could ask Fr. Sabino Ardito sdb, the Commissar, and Fr. Gianfranco Ghirlanda sj, the Canonical Consultant to make an announcement saying that they affirm Vatican Council II only with the Rational Premise.

Also the expected Apostolic Visitors and new Commissars for the Ecclesia Dei communities could announce that they accept Vatican Council II with the Rational and not Fake Premise. They also expect all religious communities to do the same.

In general, Cardinal Braz de Avez must clarify that all religious communities in the Catholic Church must only interpret Vatican Council II and extra ecclesiam nulla salus (baptism of desire, baptism of blood and invincible ignorance) with the Rational Premise. It is unethical to use the Irrational Premise to create a false rupture with Catholic Tradition (EENS, Athanasius Creed, Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX etc).

So the Latin and Novus Ordo Mass could only be allowed for religious communities which interpret Vatican Council II rationally, traditionally and honestly, without the use of the False Premise.

There are no objective cases of non Catholics saved outside the Church in the present times (1965-2021).So the New Theology which says outside the Church there is salvation has to be rejected. It is irrational and unethical for a Catholic to use the New Theology which is propped by a Fake Premise which suggests outside the Church there are known people saved without faith and the baptism of water.

The Franciscans of the Immaculate and the Ecclesia Dei traditionalist communities could confirm that they interpret Vatican Council II with the Old Theology i.e.  without confusing what is invisible as being visible, subjective as being objective, implicit as being explicit and objective as being objective.LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc in Vatican Council II are always invisible, subjective, implicit, theoretical, speculative and hypothetical, only. They are not objective examples of salvation in 2021.

So Vatican Council II is no more an issue for the Franciscans of the Immaculate as it is for the liberals. Without the False Premise Cardinal Walter Kasper cannot cite the Council. LG 16 for example, is not a break with Tradition, it does not contradict the strict interpretation of extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).Since it always  refers to an invisible and hypothetical case in 2021.

The Franciscans of the Immaculate could object if Fr. Sabino Ardito still interprets Vatican Council II with the False Premise. Also it would be unethical to allow the other community of the Franciscans of the Immaculate, who offer Holy Mass only in the vernacular, to interpret Vatican Council II, the Creeds, Catechisms and the dogma EENS, with a False Premise.

Fr. Rosario Sammarco f.i, the Rector, of the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate seminary, Tiburtina, Rome, must ask the seminarians to only interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise.

There can once again be unity in doctrine and theology between the two groups of the Franciscans of the Immaculate who were divided by Pope Francis.The division was created with the Fake Premise used to interpret the Council and which was rejected Fr. Stefano Manelli f.i, the founder of the community. So Pope Francis closed the seminary at Boccea, Rome and placed a ban on the Third Order, the lay branch of the community.

The Commissars of both groups of the Franciscans of the Immaculate Fr. Sabino 

Ardito and Fr. Gianfranco Ghirlanda must clarify that they themselves interpret Vatican Council II with the Rational Premise and not the Irrational version.-Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/12/now-franciscans-of-immaculate-are-in.html

 DECEMBER 17, 2021

The Franciscans of the Immaculate can ask the Commissar if the books on Vatican Council II can be done away with since they were written with a False Premise

 

The Franciscans of the Immaculate can ask the Commissar Fr. Sabino Ardito sdb and Canonical Consultant Fr. Gianfranco Ghirlanda sj if the books on Vatican Council II in general can be dispensed with . Since they have been written with a False Premise, Inference and non traditional conclusion.

This would include the books of Pope Benedict , Cardinal Kasper and Cardinal Semararo but also those of Fr. Serafino Lanzetta, Moms.Brunero Gherardino and Roberto dei Mattei.They all interpreted Vatican Council II with the False Premise.

The interpretation of Vatican Council II by Alberto Melloni of the Bologna School (FSCIRE) can no more be accepted. Since Vatican Council II and other Magisterial Documents read with a Rational Premise has a traditional conclusion.The Council is in harmony with the past Magisterium on the Athanasius Creed, the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX, the Catechism of Pope Pius X etc.

Fr. Gianfranco Ghirlanda is an author of books on Canon Law. He also needs to clarify for the Canonical Associations in Italy, the Roman Rota and the Jesuit Superior General, that he interprets Vatican Councuil II  only with the Rational Premise.

Vatican Council II interpreted with the Rational Premise has LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc being hypothetical and not objective in 2021.This is something obvious.It is commom sense.Invisible cases in real life are not practical exceptions for EENS. If in a box of oranges there is an apple, the apple is an exception not only because it is different but because it is there in that box.

So the Syllabus of Errors with the exclusivist ecumenism  and ecclesiocentric inter-religious dialogue, or mission, has no exception among invisible cases of LG 8, LG 14, LG 16, UR 3, NA 2, GS 22 etc, in Vatican Council II. There is no break with the past ecclesiocentrism of the Catholic Church.There are no objective examples of salvation outside the Church, without faith and baptism in 1965-2021.

The norm for salvation is faith and baptism and if there is an exception  it can only be known to God. There is no extraordinary means of salvation known to us human beings. Since physically we cannot meet or see someone saved with the baptism of desire, baptism of blood or invincible ignorance  etc.

We cannot say that there were 20 cases of the baptism of desire last year and 10 cases of persons who were saved in invincible ignorance the previous year.

So with the Rational Interpretation of Vatican Council II( LG 8, LG 16 etc are invisible) and the Irrational Interpretation ( LG 8, LG 16 etc are visible) we have two interpretations of the Council and so the different pastoral approaches since the theology is new ( with exceptions) or old ( without exceptions) and the doctrine is new ( outside the Church there is salvation) or old (outside the Church there is no salvation).-Lionel Andrades

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/12/the-franciscans-of-immaculate-can-ask.html