Thursday, April 15, 2021

Pope Francis is not Magisterial on Vatican Council II since he interprets it with it the false premise. Without the false premise the Council would be Magisterial and in harmony with the past Magisterium of the Catholic Church

 

 APRIL 15, 2021


Pope Francis and Pope Benedict's interpretation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church ( CCC 846, 1257) are non magisterial since they use a false premise to interpret CCC 846 (Outside the Church No Salvation) and CCC 1257 ( The Necessity of Baptism ).They have a rational and traditional choice which they avoid
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/pope-francis-and-pope-benedicts.html

 APRIL 15, 2021

Pope Francis keeps mentioning Vatican Council II but it's the non magisterial version of the Council


https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/pope-francis-keeps-mentioning-vatican.html



APRIL 14, 2021


Pope Francis and Pope Benedict are not magisterial on Vatican Council II since they interpret the Council with the false premise, inference and conclusion instead of the rational option. They are also not magisterial on the Nicene and Apostles Creed since they make the same mistake which can be avoided
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/pope-francis-and-pope-benedict-are-not_14.html




APRIL 13, 2021


Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican is not magisterial on Vatican Council II since he interprets the Council with the false premise, inference and conclusion instead of the rational and traditional option, in harmony with the past Magisterium of the Catholic Church.
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/cardinal-luiz-ladaria-sj-prefect-of_13.html

APRIL 13, 2021

There are articles/reports on Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise on the website of the traditionalists. They are there on the websites of the Most Holy Family Monastery, Catholicism.org,Most Holy Trinity Seminary,Novus Ordo Watch, Rorate Caeili, Remnant News, Correspondenza Romano etc. They need to be corrected

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/there-are-articlesreports-on-vatican.html

APRIL 13, 2021

The faculty at the Augustine Institute, Graduate School, Colorado interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise to create a rupture with Catholic orthodoxy and then they claim on their website that they teach orthodoxy.

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-faculty-at-augustine-institute.html

, APRIL 13, 2021

Fr.Matthew Mason, is the Director of Vocations in the diocese of Manchester, USA.He approves candidates who only interpret Vatican Council II with the false premise

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/frmatthew-mason-is-director-of.html



 APRIL 14, 2021

Pope Francis and Pope Benedict are not magisterial on Vatican Council II since they interpret the Council with the false premise, inference and conclusion instead of the rational option

 


Pope Francis and Pope Benedict are not magisterial on Vatican Council II since they interpret the Council with the false premise, inference and conclusion ( red passages below) instead of the rational option( blue passages below).

To be Magisterial they need to interpret Vatican Council II with 'the blue passages'.

The Holy Spirit cannot make an objective mistake and choose 'the red passages'. -Lionel Andrades



Fake premise

Lumen Gentium 8,Lumen Gentium 14, Lumen Gentium 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically visible cases in 1965-2021.

Fake inference
They are objective examples of salvation outside the Church.

Fake conclusion
Vatican Council II contradicts the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS).The Athanasius Creed(outside the Church there is no salvation) and the Syllabus of Errors of Pope Pius IX ( ecumenism of return) were made obsolete.

Here is my interpretation of Vatican Council II in blue.

Rational Premise
LG 8, LG 14, LG 16 etc in Vatican Council II refer to physically invisible cases in 1965-2021.They are only hypothetical and theoretical. They exist only in our mind and are not solid bodies at Newton's level of time, space and matter.

Rational Inference
They are not objective examples of salvation outside the Church for us human beings.

Rational Conclusion
Vatican Council II does not contradict EENS as it was interpreted by the Jesuits in the Middle Ages.It does not contradict the strict interpretation of EENS of St. Thomas Aquinas( saved in invincible ignorance is invisible), St. Augustine and Fr. Leonard Feeney of Boston.
The Letter of the Holy Office(Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) 1949 made an objective mistake.-Lionel Andrades

APRIL 13, 2021

The Department of Theology at the Pontifical University St. John Lateran, Rome have been informed that there are two options in the interpretation of Vatican Council II and they are using the irrational one

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-department-of-theology-at.html

APRIL 13, 2021

The faculty at the Augustine Institute, Graduate School, Colorado interpret Vatican Council II with a false premise to create a rupture with Catholic orthodoxy and then they claim on their website that they teach orthodoxy

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-faculty-at-augustine-institute.html

APRIL 13, 2021

There are articles/reports on Vatican Council II interpreted with the false premise on the website of the traditionalists. They are there on the websites of the Most Holy Family Monastery, Catholicism.org,Most Holy Trinity Seminary,Novus Ordo Watch, Rorate Caeili, Remnant News, Correspondenza Romano etc. They need to be corrected

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/there-are-articlesreports-on-vatican.html

APRIL 13, 2021

Repost : Padre Pio Prayer Groups, Neo Catechumenal Way, Charismatic Renewal, all the religious communities, Diocesan priests... the SSPX Archbishop Gerhard Muller and Archbishop Augustine Di Noia

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/repost-padre-pio-prayer-groups-neo.html


 APRIL 13, 2021

Cardinal Luiz Ladaria sj, Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Vatican is not magisterial on Vatican Council II since he interprets the Council with the false premise, inference and conclusion instead of the rational and traditional option, in harmony with the past Magisterium of the Catholic Church.

 https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/cardinal-luiz-ladaria-sj-prefect-of_13.html

APRIL 13, 2021

Bishop Steven J.Lopes interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise, inference and conclusion.He would also be interpreting the Creeds and Catechisms with the same irrationality. This is an irregular issue. It is a canonical issue : he excommunicated Fr. Vaughn Treco for supporting Tradition and opposing the false interpretation of Vatican Council II

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/bishop-steven-jlopes-interprets-vatican.html

APRIL 13, 2021

All the books on Vatican Council II on display at the Society of St. Pius X (Fraternita Sacerdotale San Pio X) center in Albano, Italy are written with the false premise. New books need to be written on the Council, interpreted without the irrational premise, inference and conclusion   https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/all-books-on-vatican-council-ii-on.html

 APRIL 12, 2021

Repost . The red is not an exception to the blue' : new extraordinary understanding of Vatican Council II

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/repost-red-is-not-exception-to-blue-new.html

 APRIL 12, 2021

Feeneyites do not have to deny the baptism of desire since BOD is always invisible and hypothetical, it never was a practical exception to EENS

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/feeneyites-do-not-have-to-deny-baptism.html

APRIL 12, 2021

Most of the material on Vatican Council II at the office of Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican Secretary of State and also at the library of the St. John Lateran University, Rome, is now obsolete

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/most-of-material-on-vatican-council-ii_53.html

APRIL 12, 2021

Most of the material on Vatican Council II on the Most Holy Family Monastery, USA website is now obsolete. It is the same for the Vatican websites

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/most-of-material-on-vatican-council-ii_12.html

APRIL 12, 2021

Most of the material on Vatican Council II on the SSPX websites is now obsolete

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/most-of-material-on-vatican-council-ii.html

APRIL 11, 2021

There is the Augustine Institute, Graduate School in Colorado, USA and there is the St. Augustine Institute of Wisdom, at the St. Benedict Center,New Hampshire,USA. I would recommend the latter

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/there-is-augustine-instiute-graduate.html

APRIL 11, 2021

Fr. Leonard Feeney, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Archbishop Pierre Thuc did not know that Vatican Council II could be interpreted without the false premise, inference and conclusion

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/for-fr-leonard-feeney-and-archbishop.html

APRIL 10, 2021

All these years the main line media in the USA and Europe have criticized Lefebvre and Feeney. What will they now do when they discover that Vatican Council II supports the two traditionalists ?

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/all-these-years-main-line-media-in-usa.html

 APRIL 9, 2021

Why should the readers of the Most Holy Family Monastery(MHFM) website interpret Vatican Council II like Michael and Peter Dimond and not like me ?

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/why-should-readers-of-most-holy-family.html

 APRIL 9, 2021

The interpretation of Magisterial documents by the present two popes would be different from that of the popes before 1930,who did not use the false premise. The popes at that time were Feeneyites. Today they are Cushingites

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/the-interpretation-of-magisterial.html

 APRIL 9, 2021

It was not known to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Fr. Leonard Feeney : Vatican Council II is in harmony with 16th century EENS. There is no ' development of doctrine' 

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/it-was-not-known-to-archbishop-marcel.html

APRIL 8, 2021

Repost : The Boston Heresy Case refers historic magisterial heresy in the Catholic Church

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/repost-boston-heresy-case-refers.html

APRIL 8, 2021

Without the irrational premise the Council supports Tradition and the suspended priests. The Council without the false premise supports the priests and not the bishops : Ferrara-Commacchio, Italy and Mons. Luigi Negri

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/without-irrational-premise-council.html

APRIL 7, 2021

If Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre interpreted Vatican Council II without the false premise in 1965 there would be no liberal-traditionalist division in the Catholic Church today

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/if-archbishop-marcel-lefebvre.html

APRIL 7, 2021

Repost : Robert Kennedy asked Richard Cushing to suppress Fr. Leonard Feeney

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/repost-robert-kennedy-asked-richard.html

APRIL 6, 2021

When it is said that Lumen Gentium 16 ( invincible ignorance) is an exception to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) and Catholic Tradition, this is a conclusion. The premise is that there are physically visible cases of non Catholics saved in invincible ignorance.Otherwise there could not be exceptions. But this is a false premise

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/when-it-is-said-that-lumen-gentium-16.html

MARCH 14, 2021

So why did Vatican Council II mention salvation outside the Church, when there is no known salvation outside the Church?

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/03/so-why-did-vatican-council-ii-mention.html

_________________________________


Lionel Andrades,
Catholic lay man in Rome, 
Writer on the two interpretations of Vatican Council II, the Creeds, Catechisms and extra ecclesiam nulla salus.One is rational and the other irrational, one has the false premise and the other is without it,
blog: Eucharist and Mission
Tel:-

_____________________



Posted by at No comments:

Benjamin Harnwell and Steve Bannon could call attention to religious discrimination : Carthusians do not have a right to the property in the present times under the DHI tenure

 Just thinking aloud.

Benjamin Harnwell has been paying an annual rent of 100 thousand euros per month and now he could claim religious discrimination and so object to the Carthusians and Bishop Lorenzo Loppa occupying the Trisulti Monastary.


1) The bishop and the Carthusians use a false premise to interpret Magisterial documents which create an artificial rupture with Tradition. So they are favored by the Leftist government.If they did not use the false premise they would be traditionalists and would not be supported by the Left.

2) Since they use the false premise officially this is deception. It is promoting a false hood. This is not permitted by Italian law. 

3) Since they use the false premise, inference and conclusion, they are favored by the Italian government in a non separation of leftist State and Church. The Italian government reportedly gives Alberto Melloni's Bologna School over a million euros. He interprets Vatican Council II with the false premise, like the Carthusians and Bishop Loppa.

4) There are leftist laws which oppose religious discrimination. Harwell could announce that he chooses to interpret Vatican Council II, extra ecclesiam nulla salus, the Creeds and Catechisms of the Catholic Church without the false premise and this is his Catholic religious belief and not that of the Carthusians and Bishop Lorenzo Loppa. -Lionel Andrades







https://parallelozero.com/the-trumpian-monastery/



APRIL 15, 2021

Steve Bannon and Benjamin Harnwell must recognise that this is a religious issue

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2021/04/steve-bannon-and-benjamin-harnwell-must.html

Posted by at No comments:

Pope Francis and Pope Benedict's interpretation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church ( CCC 846, 1257) are non magisterial since they use a false premise to interpret CCC 846 (Outside the Church No Salvation) and CCC 1257 ( The Necessity of Baptism ).They have a rational and traditional choice which they avoid

Pope Francis and Pope Benedict's interpretation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church ( CCC 846, 1257) are non magisterial since they use a false premise to interpret CCC846(Outside the Church No Salvation) and CCC 1257 ( The Necessity of Baptism ).

They have a rational and traditional choice which they avoid.- Lionel Andrades





LINKS FROM THE RIGHT- HAND BAR OF THIS BLOG. CLICK TO ACCESS



______________________________________

 JANUARY 24, 2017

CCC 846 and 1257 support the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma EENS.

Image result for Photos of catechism of the catholic church book
What is interesting about the Catechism is that it can be interpreted in two ways.
I
If you consider the three conditions for mortal sin as objective,judgeable and manifest then the Catechism is a rupture with the old 'fixed' teachings on morals. There is a new moral theology. A mortal sin is not aways a mortal sin.
II
If you consider the three conditions as subjective,non judgeable and invisible for us human beings, then the Catechism is not a rupture with the traditional teachings on morals. It is irrelevant to mortal sin. A mortal sin is always a mortal sin and the outward action indicates the subjective state of sin(Veritatis Splendor).
 
 
____________________
I
Similarly if you consider CCC 846( Outside the Church No Salvation) as referring to known cases of the baptism of desire and being saved in invincible ignorance, then the Catechism is a rupture with the centuries old interpretation of the dogma EENS. Since there are exceptions and so every one does not need to be incorporated into the Church for salvation.This was said boldly and heretically in the Letter of the Holy Office 1949.

II
If you consider them as being hypothetical, theoretical and invisible for us human beings then the Catechism(846) is not a rupture with the dogma WEENS according to the 16th century missionaries.It does not contradict St. Francis Xavier and St. Ignatius of Loyola.
______________________

This same reasoning can be used with CCC 1257 on the necessity of the baptism of water for all for salvation.
I
If there are personally known cases of people saved without the baptism of water in the Catholic Church, since God is not limited to the Sacraments, then the Catechism is a rupture with the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma EENS.There is an exception.
II
If you consider being saved in invincible ignorance and the baptism of desire(without the baptism of water) or because God is not limited to the Sacraments, as referring to hypothetical, speculative and personally unknown cases in our reality in 2017,then the Catechism is not a rupture with the dogma EENS.
Then CCC 846 and 1257 support the 'rigorist interpretation' of the dogma EENS.There can be no known exceptions to the dogma.
This is why I often affirm Feeneyite EENS and use CCC 846 and 1257 as a supporting reference.
For many readers all this could be new and hard to believe.'It could not be all that simple '' they ask.'Why didn't someone mention this before?'.
Yet the proof is there before our very eyes.We can check it out.
-Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/search/label/Catechism%20of%20the%20Catholic%20Church?updated-max=2017-04-24T20:25:00%2B01:00&max-results=20&start=6&by-date=false
________________________


Cushingism assumes there are known exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus(EENS) as known to the 16th century missionaries.
Feeneyism says there are no known exceptions to the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS and the baptism of desire or blood or being saved in invincible ignorance are hypothetical cases and so they cannot be exceptions to EENS in the first place.
This is Cushingism and Feeneyism according to me.

The present two popes are Cushingite and I am Feeneyite.Their interpretation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church is Cushingite and mine is Feeneyite.

The interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) in the Catechism of the Catholic Church N.846 is a Cushingite interpretation.It assumes the baptism of desire etc are explicit and so are relevant to EENS.
It does not directly say that all need to enter the Church with no exceptions. Pope John Paul II and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger were Cushingite.
"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

CCC 846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers? Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:
The Feeneyite interpretation of N.846 would say  all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body and this does not negate all needing to be formal members of the Church with 'faith and baptism'(AG 7, LG 14) for salvation.

Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence 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.
The Feeneyite interpretation of this passage from Ad Gentes 7, Vatican Council II would say that the passage in blue is not contradicted by the passage in red. The passage in red refers to hypothetical cases.So they are not exceptions to the Feneeyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus or the passage in blue.

CCC 847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience - those too may achieve eternal salvation.

CCC 848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."
The Feeneyite interpretation would say CCC 847 and CCC 848 are irrelevant to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus and should not have been mentioned here or in Vatican Council II.They refer to invisible cases in our reality. They never were exceptions to the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
So we have a Cushingite interpretation of outside the Church there is no salvation in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (846).Since CCC 846,847 and 848 suggest hypothetical cases can be relevant or exceptions to all needing faith and baptism for salvation.This is why it was mentioned.
However we can also have a Feeneyite interpretation of CCC 846.The citation in CCC 846 from Ad Gentes 7 can be interpreted as Feeneyite extra ecclesiam nulla salus. It says all need faith and baptism for salvation and there is no ambiguity in this passage, since there are no explicit cases of being saved in invincible ignorance or the baptism of desire without the baptism of water.
Vatican Council II and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1995) would affirm the Feeneyite interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus.
-Lionel Andrades

_____________________

 APRIL 8, 2016

Amoris Laetitiae reflects the confusion and contradictions of the Catechism's liberal moral theology

CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
1857 For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: "Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent."
Lionel : 'committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent'.This was a way to suggest that subjectively we could know when a sin is not a mortal sin.It was a way to phase out the traditional teaching on mortal sin.
1858 Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother."132 The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.
1859 Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God's law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.
Lionel: So we cannot  say that a mortal sin is always a  mortal since since there are subjective factors that we can never know of. This was the liberal moral theology that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger gave us in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
Then in  Veritatis Splendor Cardinal Ratzinger opposes it in the criticism of the Fundamental Option Theory.
1860 Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense. But no one is deemed to be ignorant of the principles of the moral law, which are written in the conscience of every man. The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders. Sin committed through malice, by deliberate choice of evil, is the gravest.

MORE EXCEPTIONS
Lionel : Here are more exceptions in the Catechism to suggest that mortal sin can no more be judged.
'Unintentional ignorance can diminish or even remove the imputability of a grave offense.' How can we judge if any one living in mortal sin is in unintentional ignorance ? So why was it mentioned?
The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense, as can external pressures or pathological disorders.
Lionel :'The promptings of feelings and passions can also diminish the voluntary and free character of the offense'. This liberal moral theology is there throughout Amoris Laetitae.
"Hence it is can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace." -Amoris Laetitae (#301)
Why not ? Since we cannot subjectively know or judge any objective case of mortal sin.
We have the exceptions used to refute the general rule, the standard teaching.
We have a Catechism which says mortal sin is objective and known AND ALSO there are times when mortal sin is not a mortal sin.
Similarly we have a Catechism which says every one needs the baptism of water for salvation (CCC 1257) but since God is not limited to the Sacraments, some people do not need the baptism of water for salvation.
Image result for pHOTOS OF confusion and contradictions
KNOWN SALVATION OUTSIDE THE CHURCH
There is known salvation outside the Church for Cardinal Ratzinger, as if he personally knew of an exception. So every one does not need to enter the Church formally  and so there is no dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus, for Cardinal Ratzinger.There is no  more the old ecclesiology.Salvation theology has been changed with the irrationality ( known exceptions).
The known exceptions ruse is also used in moral theology with reference to mortal sin.
There are exceptions to the traditional teaching on mortal sin ( as if they are known, or can be judged by us humans).So since there 'known exceptions' in moral theology,we cannot say that a couple living in adultery is in mortal sin.
"Hence it is  (sic) can no longer simply be said that all those in any “irregular” situation are living in a state of mortal sin and are deprived of sanctifying grace." (#301).
Image result for pHOTOS OF contradictions
INVISIBLE CASES ARE VISIBLE
See the pattern. Unknown cases are considered to be known and relevant to the moral ( mortal sin) or faith teaching( extra ecclesiam nulla salus) and so with the new exceptions the old teaching is discarded.

'VISIBLE CASES' ARE EXCEPTIONS
Traditional teaching on morals and salvation(faith) was changed and Cardinal Ratzinger was at the central point. The new document by Pope Francis simply continues with the same use of an irrationality (explicit exceptions) to change the teachings of the Church on morality, the Sacraments and the Eucharist.
-Lionel Andrades
https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2016/04/amoris-laetitiae-reflects-confusion-and.html
___________________________________

APRIL 2, 2016

The Catechism and Vatican Council II are not a break with the dogma EENS unless invisible and visible, hypothetical and objective cases are confused : how would Dr.Robert Hickson interpret CCC 1257 ?









How would Dr.Robert Hickson interpret the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1257) ? He has a choice and he doesn't know it.

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit."God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.-Catechism of the Catholic Church.

 'but he himself is not bound by his sacraments'. Is this relevant or an exception to the interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS) according to the 16th century missionaries? Probably it is an exception  for Robert and Maike Hickson.
But not for me.
1. Since I do not know any one  this year who will be saved without the Sacraments.
2.Neither would Maike and Robert Hickson know of any one in 2016 or in the past who was  saved without the Sacraments.
3.I look at CCC 1257 with the theology of Feeneyism i.e there are no known exceptions to EENS. For Maike and Robert Hickson, Cardinal Ratzinger and Fr.John Hardon, it was with the theology of Cushingism ( there are known exceptions to the dogma EENS and so every one does not need to enter the Church formally as it was believed in the 16th century.)
4.For me in principle hypothetical cases cannot be objectively seen.
5.The baptism of desire and blood,LG 16, LG 8, UR 3, NA 2 etc refer to invisible and not visible cases.

FEENEYISM OR CUSHINGISM CHOICE
So there is a choice. We can interpret CCC 1257 with Feeneyism or Cushingism, with rationality or with an irrationality, according to Tradition or opposed to Tradition, in agreement with the pre-Council of Trent magisterium or in agreement with the contemporary magisterium.

KASPER'S FALSE CLAIM
For Pope Benedict and Cardinal Kasper the interpretation of CCC 1257 is Cushingite. So we have the hermeneutic of rupture. There is a break with the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS.So  Cardinal Kasper could ask for other teachings of the Church to be also changed like EENS.If he makes this claim, we must note that there is no change in ecclesiology, there is no rejection of EENS according to Fr.Leonard Feeney and the 16th century missionaries.EENS should not be made a reference when the Synod Exhortation is announced next Friday,April 8.

VISIBLE-INVISIBLE CONFUSION
So it is important to know that the Catechism(1992) and Vatican Council II is not a break with the dogma EENS unless invisible and visible, hypothetical and objective cases are confused.What is invisible, Cardinal Kasper assumes is visible.So visible LG 16 is a break with the dogma EENS for him.

LG 14 TEXT BASED ON 1949 MISTAKE
It was because of this confusion in 1949 Boston, that it was assumed every one does not need to enter the Church and that a person in invincible ignorance can be saved without the baptism of water.So they inserted in Lumen Gentium 14 the text saying only those persons need to enter the Church to avoid Hell, who know about Jesus and the Church.Since those who are saved in invincible ignorance are exceptions to the dogma, was the understanding in 1949 Boston.Remember this understanding was based on a falsehood i.e there is known salvation outside the Church, someone saw people in Heaven without the baptism of water.It is upon this irrationality that we have this text in LG 14.
Related image
LUMEN GENTIUM 14 HAS A MISTAKE
14. This Sacred Council wishes to turn its attention firstly to the Catholic faithful. Basing itself upon Sacred Scripture and Tradition, it teaches that the Church, now sojourning on earth as an exile, is necessary for salvation. Christ, present to us in His Body, which is the Church, is the one Mediator and the unique way of salvation. In explicit terms He Himself affirmed the necessity of faith and baptism and thereby affirmed also the necessity of the Church, for through baptism as through a door men enter the Church. Whosoever, therefore, knowing that the Catholic Church was made necessary by Christ, would refuse to enter or to remain in it, could not be saved.
They are fully incorporated in the society of the Church who, possessing the Spirit of Christ accept her entire system and all the means of salvation given to her, and are united with her as part of her visible bodily structure and through her with Christ, who rules her through the Supreme Pontiff and the bishops. The bonds which bind men to the Church in a visible way are profession of faith, the sacraments, and ecclesiastical government and communion. He is not saved, however, who, though part of the body of the Church, does not persevere in charity. He remains indeed in the bosom of the Church, but, as it were, only in a "bodily" manner and not "in his heart."(12*) All the Church's children should remember that their exalted status is to be attributed not to their own merits but to the special grace of Christ. If they fail moreover to respond to that grace in thought, word and deed, not only shall they not be saved but they will be the more severely judged.
Catechumens who, moved by the Holy Spirit, seek with explicit intention to be incorporated into the Church are by that very intention joined with her. With love and solicitude Mother Church already embraces them as her own.-Lumen Gentium 14, Vatican Council II

(Note: Why did the text in red have to be inserted in LG 14 which refers to all needing 'faith and baptism', similar to EENS which says all need to convert into the Church?
The text in red refers to hypothetical cases. They are meaningless in this passage.They cannot be relevant to all needing 'faith and baptism'. They cannot be exceptions to all needing 'faith and baptism'.
They were inserted since in 1949 Boston they were considered to be explicit, seen in flesh exceptions to EENS.The objective mistake from the Letter (1949) is carried over into Vatican Council II (LG 14).There was a 'development of a dogma' based on a factual mistake in the Cardinal Marchetti Selvaggiani letter, issued during the pontificate of Pope Pius XII.)

THEOLOGY BASED ON A MISTAKE
The LG 14 insertion comes from the Holy Office 1949 and the Archdiocese of Boston wrongly assuming there is salvation outside the Church, since there are known cases, physically known cases of persons saved without the baptis mof water.People in Heaven were considered exceptions on on earth.

SAME PATTERN IN LG 8 TOO
It was based on this objective error that LG 8 mentions being saved with 'elements of sanctification and truth', as if these cases are known and so relevant to the dogma EENS.

UR 3 IS ALSO HYPOTHETICAL
Similarly it is based on this objective error in 1949 that UR 3 refers to those Christians saved in imperfect communion with the Church, as if these cases are known and phyiscally visible, so they were mentioned in Vatican Council II.

NA 2 WAS SUPERFLOUS
Similarly NA 2 refers to 'that ray of the Truth'.This is another hypothetical case interpreted as being objective, since this was the error pattern at Boston in 1949.It should not have been mentioned in Vatican Council II. It is like dead wood, flotsam and jetsam and unecessary Cushing Addition.
Related imageRelated image
MORE FLOTSAM AND JETSAM
Ad Gentes 7 mentions 'seeds of the Word' and AG 7 and LG 14 refer to the catechuman saved with the desire for the baptism of water, which he did not receive before dieing and there are those  cases of persons in invincible ignorance, allegedly personally known and saved. None of these cases should have been mentioned in Vatican Council II.
There cannot be adevelopent of a doctrine or dogma based on invisible cases.However the mistake was made in 1949 and the error transferred  to Vatican Council II on a big scale. It is as if they called up the Council only to officially approve the error in the 1949 Cardinal Marchetti Selvaggiani Letter from Rome.

EVEN A POPE CAN MAKE A FACTUAL ERROR
This is a magisterial error. If any one, pope or cardinal, infers that we humans can physically see people in Heaven saved this year with or without the baptism of water, it is nonsense.-Lionel Andrades

Maike Hickson

It would be useful if Dr.Maike Hickson could comment on this before the Synod Exhortation is out http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/it-would-be-useful-if-drmaike-hickson.html


Dr. Robert Hickson
Cardinal Ratzinger, Fr.John Hardon and Robert Hickson were interpreting the Catechism and Vatican Council II with irrational Cushingism as a theology
http://eucharistandmission.blogspot.it/2016/04/cardinal-ratzinger-frjohn-hardon-and.html

https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-catechism1992-and-vatican-council.html
_______________________

AUGUST 14, 2015

I follow the Catechism of Trent in agreement with Vatican Council II and the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus

I can follow the Catechism of Trent in agreement with Vatican Council II and the strict interpretation of the dogma extra ecclesiam nulla salus (EENS)
Since being saved in invincible ignorance (I.I) and the baptism of desire (BOD) mentioned in Vatican Council II (AG 7,LG 14) are always invisible and theoretical for me. So BOD and BOB  cannot be exceptions to all needing to be formal members of the Church.All need 'faith and baptism' in 2015 for salvation.I keep the Pius XII Error in mind when reading Vatican Council II .
So all references to salvation, I note when reading, are not objective. They cannot be objective for us humans . They would be known only to God. So the traditional interpretation of the dogma EENS , the Feeneyite version; the pre-1885 version is not contradicted by any reference to salvation in Vatican Council II.
For example when Unitatitis Redintigratio 3, Vatican Council II, refers to those saved in imperfect communion with the Church, this would have to be a theoretical case in 2015.I cannot personally know any such case.Neither can you.
It would also have to be followed by the baptism of water, I make a theoretical note, since the dogma says so and I don't know of any exception,personally.
Similarly  I can accept the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1995) , which is based on Vatican Council II.It does not contradict the Catechism of Trent if the Pius XII Error is avoided i.e if the baptism of desire (BOD) and the baptism of blood (BOB) and being saved in invincible ignorance(I.I) are accepted as theoretical possibilities ( followed by the baptism of water). They do not refer to defacto, objective cases in 2015.
So the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 1257 and 846) do not contradict the Feeneyite version of the dogma on exclusive salvation in the Catholic Church.
Immagine correlata
So I affirm the old ecclesiology in line with Vatican Council II.
Everything falls in place.This is the beauty of Catholic doctrine. It is premise like mathematics.
-Lionel Andrades



https://eucharistandmission.blogspot.com/2015/08/i-follow-catechism-of-trent-in.html


Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)